 So my phone says 430. So I'd like to get started if we can. So I'd like to call the regular scheduled meeting of the Design Review Board of City Center Rosa to order at 430. And I'd like to remind everybody while why we are in this virtual setting. Due to the due to the provisions of the governor's executive orders and 2520. And in 2920, which to spend certain requirements of the Brown act, the designer review board will be participating via zoom webinar. Members of the public can participate in the meeting virtually by navigating to www.zoom.us and entering the meeting ID 948 0971 1719. Or by calling in toll free 877 853 5257 and entering the meeting ID. I just read. You can also watch the proceedings on the city's website at srcity.org. On the city's YouTube channel and also on Comcast channel 28 with that recording secretary. I'd like to have a roll call at the record reflect that all board members are present. Thank you. And with next item is the approval of minutes. Did everybody get a chance to look at the minutes? I found an error in the minutes. Item 3 or item 2 and item 4 appear to be similar. Did everybody else see that is or am I mistaken? It's on page 3 of the minutes. I think we should strike item 2 because item 4 is the one that is more thorough. Is that correct? You are agree with that. Yes. Yeah, I agree. Okay. So, let the record reflect striking under the approval of item 8.1. We're going to strike condition number 2 as it's repeated in condition number 4 and renumber accordingly. Should get that Patty. Yes, I did. Okay, awesome. Hearing no objections to that. We'll approve the minutes. Item 3 public comment at this time. We invite members of the public to comment on items that are within this board's purview, but please, if you are making a public comment, do not comment on anything that is on the agenda for the evening. Just items that are pertinent to our purview. So we're going to go to public comment currently we don't have any raised hands. Anybody from the public would like to speak on an item not on the agenda. If you raise your hand, we can select you and let you unmute. We have one raised hand. We have Tim McCarthy Smith and Mr Smith, you have the ability to unmute. Hi, thank you for letting me speak. I just logged on. Sorry, I was a few minutes late. I attended a meeting, I guess a month or so ago about the, about this 38 North expansion. I'm just curious how this meeting is different from the last one that talked about the nuts and bolts of the buildings and all. So, since you have a comment germane to an item on the agenda, we're going to hold that to the actual item, which is item, I believe 8.2. But just so you know, I'll answer real quick. So, item 8.1 is a public hearing, which means that we're going to be voting on the item and making a determination on whether or not to move that project forward or not. Item 8.2 is what's called a concept design review and so typically that's a bit of an informal conversation with the applicant team about their so they're going to give us a proposal about the project. And then we'll provide some feedback and comments and then typically then they come back again for their official public hearing. Assuming it is has that pleasure of different projects have different requirements for whether or not they're going to come back for a public hearing or not depending on what design review item they have. That's a good question, but 8.2 is specific to that and you can ask a public comment. You can speak again for that item if you'd like. Okay, so item for board business. This is where we read the statement out of the zoning code about design review board. If you can formally close public comments, please. Sorry, I will formally close public comment. I apologize, Patty. Thanks. Item for board business zoning code chapter 205030 F project review review authority shall consider the location design site plan configuration and the overall effect. Of the proposed project upon surrounding properties and the city in general review shall be conducted by comparing the proposed project to the general plan any applicable specific plan applicable zoning code standards and requirements. Consistency of the project within the city's design guidelines architectural criteria for special areas and other applicable city requirements, e.g. city policy statements and development plans. So then we'll move on to item 5 board member reports. Are there any board member reports. This evening seeing none will move to item 6 department reports and turn it over to interim deputy director bill rose. Good afternoon chair weigel members of the board. It's nice to see you all know department reports for tonight. So, I'm the interest of time. I'll turn it back to you. We can continue on to our main items. Thanks bill and item number 7 statement of abstentions. I believe there is one statement of abstention this evening. I think it's one chairman weigel. Yes, I'm abstaining from item 8.3. The Providence application as I had worked with the landowner hasn't closed title. So that's a conflict. So I'm abstaining. Thanks so much vice chair hedge path. And then without further ado, we'll move to our scheduled items and we're going to move to item 8.1, which is a continued public hearing. For Santa Rosa farm group cannabis cultivate cultivation facility located at 800 Yolanda Avenue file number DR 17 dash 017. And this is the only item this evening that requires ex parte disclosure. Does anybody have any ex parte disclosure at this time and then we'll go to the staff report. Seeing no ex parte disclosure at this time. We'll go to acting supervising planner Andrew triple for a staff presentation. Great. Thank you chair weigel. Good afternoon members of the design review board. I will go ahead and share my presentation screen. So if somebody could please let me know if that's sharing correctly. We see you. Great. Thank you so much. So this evening's preliminary design review of Santa Rosa farm group cannabis cultivation facility. Located at 800 Yolanda Avenue is continued design review from a previous meeting that was held on June 3 2021. So preliminary and final design review are required for this project. So the project is development of a approximately 116,000 square foot industrial building. For the cannabis land use is identified here in this table. The design review board could decide to approve as an option of preliminary and final design review this evening if it chooses to do so. So this is a preliminary and final design review of Santa Rosa farm group cannabis land use is identified here in this table. Cultivation manufacturing non volatile and volatile distribution and a testing laboratory for this facility only. These cannabis land uses were approved by planning commission in an April 2021 public hearing. The project is located at the intersection of Yolanda Avenue with Petaluma Hill Road on the southwest corner of the intersection. Just as for a point of reference concept design review this evening for the 38 degrees north phase three project will be a diagonal on the intersection on the what would be the northeastern side of this image here. So the general plan is light industry and the zoning is light industrial. It is part of the Yolanda Avenue light industrial zoning district however to the south of the properties project site. It does about low density and medium density or I guess medium low density residential uses. And there's a zoom in on the general plan and zoning of the site. A bit of project history pre application meeting concept design review were both completed planning commission completed its work on April 8 and then the project again came before design review board initially on June 3 proposed site plan. It is important again to recognize that the project does retain a lot of the site as undeveloped area. So development proposed development is generally constrained to that portion of the site that was previously developed. And then we can see here how the proposed development is laid over the already previously developed portions of the site. And so the proposed site plan in the interest of time and because the applicant has provided a thorough application for presentation to the design review board. We'll we'll defer those design details that are being presented to the applicants presentation. However following the continuation of preliminary design review. The next step didn't struck the applicant to provide or address the following details for the utility building and guard building including plan and exterior elevations exterior elevations for garbage enclosure. In addition to the plan and exterior elevations. The plan and exterior elevations. And to reduce reflectiveness of the aluminum skin and provide a pallet on the on the primary building. And provide a pallet that is earthy and natural such as terracotta bronze. And provide a solid, clean and spring-frozen steel in a matte finish. Additionally a planning staff received a public comment on July 8 from an adjacent property owner who had also previously commented on the project. This public comment was shared as a meeting item document. and asks with regard to the four 15-foot light standards and three light fixtures attached to the building along the Southern property parking lot that DRB require a lighting solution that would locate the fixtures closer to the ground. And then a second was a reiteration of a similar comment that she provided at the first preliminary design review. A bit modified asking that DRB require a continuous line of evergreen trees along the Southern boundary of the subject site to visually buffer the industrial building from the view of the adjacent existing and future residences. Planning staff would also like to note that, of course, the previous meeting held on June 3rd was available via video link, both on YouTube and on the city site for the applicant team to be able to review the proceedings of that meeting in full detail. With that, planning staff is available for any questions. Well, let me, the recommendation then, it is recommended by Planning and Economic Development Department that the Design Review Board approve preliminary design review for the Santa Rosa Farm Group Cannabis Facility new construction. And planning staff is available for any questions and then we'll support the applicant for presentation. Thank you. Thanks, Andrew. At this time, I'd like to invite the applicant to make a presentation if they'd like to. They don't have to, but if they'd like to, they're welcome to. Hello, Design Review Board. Can you hear me? This is Jim Pugh from Shepherd Mullen. We can hear you and I was just gonna tell Patty, it looks like we've got a couple of raised hands there. It looks like they're proud of the applicant team. So thanks. Danny Abdomalik should also be on from Santa Rosa Farm Groups as well. I'll just start by saying, go to see you all again and just a brief reminder, we did quite a long hearing last time and as staff just pointed out, the focus of this hearing will be on those four items that you requested. And we can show you a couple of slides that were attached to the agenda that implement the four requested items that you asked the applicant to do. And Danny, if he's on and elevated to his speaking capacity, he could address that now. Yeah, good afternoon, Board Members. Thank you for taking the time again to resolve these last remaining issues. Andrew, you could go ahead and start the presentation and what I'm going to do is, we know what the concerns are and as we go through the slides, I'll point out how those concerns were addressed in the slide as we get to each page. So first slide, just the rendering site plan. We can go to the next one. This is again, another rendering. We're gonna get a close up of this, but you can see already that we did tone down reflectivity and we did try to go with more of a earth tone, a greenish grayish color and a grayish color to kind of obviously blend in with the area. Next slide, please. Okay, so here, page four, you get to see a close up of the fence details. And again, close up of the changes that we made regarding the reflectivity issues. Again, we went with more of a matte and muted gray earth tones. The bottom half is a greenish grayish color and the top half is more of a silver gray color. Next slide, please. Here we are showing details of the utility building. So it is rendered on the top and we are again going with the same color theme as the main building with the muted matte and matte gray and matte green grayish colors. And then we also label, the fences stayed the same but we did label it. And I'm just gonna call out the material so you guys can hear it. I'm not sure how visible they are but the solid part of the wall is going to be a precast concrete panels. Then it transitions into laser cut metal panels and then the tubing is going to be one in a quarter inch metal tubes. Next slide, please. So here it's again just calling out some of the materials. I know it's hard to see but if you zoom in on the seventh column, all materials are called out as matte. Next slide, please. So we were asked to do elevations of the utility building, the trash enclosure and the guard shack. So that's what we have here. Next slide, please. So here we have our material board showing the updated colors. I want to point out the bottom left picture which is a real life building with a matte gray panel that has no reflectivity. Now our colors aren't the same as our building but the reflectivity will be similar, which is none. Next slide, please. And then we were also asked to get specs and samples of what our outside LED lighting would be. So these are two examples of what we would use outside of our building. So I tried to cover again just to recap. We were asked details for utility guard building, elevations for utility guard building and trash enclosure, fence details and what materials would be used. And the fourth point was to reduce reflectivity of the building and I'd be more than happy to answer any questions if there are any questions. Perfect, thanks so much, Danny. So I'm gonna do board questions for both staff and applicant and then we're gonna open the public hearing, take public comment and then we'll close public hearing and then we'll kind of go to our normal process. That's not good to everybody. All right, so we're gonna go around the horn here, reverse alphabetical order, questions of both staff and applicant. So we're gonna start with board member Wolski. Thank you. I did the last meeting where this was heard and I did have a couple of questions from that. It was the terracotta, I think it's a 26 foot terracotta panel on the East and West elevations. I don't know if that was a part of the plans before if that was newly added in response to DRB's comments. And I thought I heard something or a request about a greater variety of trees and I don't know that I saw anything on that. And then I think that's it for now. Thank you. Those sound like questions of the applicant. So Danny, can you clarify those please? Yeah, we agreed to a diverse find of trees in the manner that was recommended by the board. We weren't able to put that into our renderings but we agreed to that point. And then I'm sorry, could you repeat your first question? I didn't really wrap my head around that one. You're muted Sheila. Thank you. I thought that I saw on the East and West elevations of the building, perhaps it was added a 26 foot terracotta panel. Is that the yellowish color? Yeah, it was going up and down the building. I'll have to, I'll look over the plans again. Yeah, if you could point out what page of the slide that would help me answer the question. I think she's actually, Danny, I think she's referring to something in the plan set that you submitted. So I don't know, Andrew, do you have the ability to bring up attachment 17, I don't know, sorry, attachment 18, I believe. And I think Sheila's talking about page... Yes. I want to pick A041, which is page four, it looks like, of that attachment. If we can maybe get that on the screen, that would, I think that would help everybody. Was it down in the material schedule? Yeah, it's down in the, it's item W7, which says terracotta rib, and then it says charcoal mat. So it might just be a typo, but I think that's, and I couldn't find it on the actual elevation. Maybe Sheila could speak to where she found the call out. Yeah, I think I was in the same place here where I didn't see on the color and material board what that would look like. A terracotta, I usually think of kind of a muted pink, I guess, but let me look a little closer. It's on that finished schedule that was just up on the screen. Right, but it's... I think we were trying to identify where... It's not identified. Yeah, it's on, I found it. It's on the East and West elevations. So on the next page, Andrew, too far. And then if you go in the middle, so the panels that are going horizontal like this on both elevations there, yeah, there, and then down, I believe that's what Sheila's representing. So this would be the West elevation at this point and then the East elevation offset from, I believe these are the entry doors, south of the loading dock, yeah. Yeah, I'm looking at the renderings of the, trying to find renderings of the East and West side. There, I know there's an accent door on the North side of the building, which is a yellowish color, the terracotta color. I don't see that color in our renderings, but I guess, is it called out in that elevation? I think it might be that it's a terracotta panel from a materiality standpoint, but it's charcoal gray. Right, I'm thinking the ribbed, it may be a kind of a clay tile panel, something of that nature or a clay tile application that hangs, the term terracotta is odd to address, but maybe. Yeah, I appreciate your comment, because in no renderings that I've seen, is there any color on this building that isn't a gray tone other than the mural that goes along the bottom front and the front door on the North side? So I think that's what it is. I think it's maybe just a material as opposed to a pinkish color. It does, up on the screen now I do have renderings from the East and West elevation that were submitted for the June 3rd public hearing, and it does appear that it is shown in these renderings. So the East elevation at that same location, and then West elevation then, the same location as well. Right, it looks like it's like a ribbed material. So, but that's the color it's gonna be. Cool, did that answer your questions, Sheila? It looks like it's been there all along. It does, thank you. I just wanted to confirm there's no pink in there. All right, so we'll go to Board Member Wicks now. Quick question for the applicant. The photo or the pictures of the light fixtures that you provided in this package, are they the same light fixtures that were used in the photometric plan on page 17 of your project set? Yes, those spec lights are provided by my electrical engineer. Okay, and they all, I'm reviewing your photometric plan in kind of in response to some late correspondence that we got about a neighbor being concerned about the lighting at the parking lot. As I read your photometric plan, you've got a 0.0 foot candle at all property lines. Is that how you are reading it as well? You know, I'd have to pull that up, but I assume that the engineer designed it within city code. We will also have... This is Jim to you from Shepard Mall and a member of Wicks. That's right. It's designed to make sure there's no lights bill over and comply with the city's code for, you know, on-site and off-site uses as represented in that photometric plan. Great, thank you very much. Board Member Sharon. Applicant and staff. Yeah, unmuted. Excellent. Thank you for the presentation, Andrew, and from the applicant. Thank you for bringing back and addressing our comments. And thank you Board Member Wolskie for picking up on the trees and seeing our presentation from early in June. Question for staff about that. Since the, in your memo, it calls out four areas to be addressed. It was called out on... So the tree pallet to diversify the tree pallet was a consider. And so that's fine that that's not included. And the applicant, Danny, you mentioned that you've agreed to do that. So that's great. You know, we'll take you on your word there. Board Member Sharon, if I might. Yeah. From the June 3rd meeting, we did have two draft conditions of approval related to tree plantings. The first was that the project shall diversify the heritage tree selection with use of allio and then to consider additional tree pallet diversity through the use of Desert Willow, Black Maple, Toyon Shrub, Northern California Walnut, California Blannelbush, Western Redbud, and California Buckeye, for example, for both structure and beauty. This, and so we didn't include those because the Board, I think, felt confident that those conditions were sufficient for the tree plantings. What is a bit different, the previous public comment asked that the original proposed coaxed live oaks along the Southern boundary be changed because of the risk for disease in coastal live oaks. So then the tree pallet diversity condition of approval would accomplish that. I think it's different now in that the same commenter is now requesting that evergreen trees be required to be planted along that Southern boundary line to shield residences from the development. So there is a bit, I think the public comment evolved a bit. The Board responded to the public comment on June 3rd and then that public comment evolved as well. Agreed, yeah, yeah, no, definitely that was a change there. And thank you for addressing that. And my question was going to be since the old diversify, there's the consider but then the shall diversify the heritage trees of the alley oaks, that wasn't addressed specifically in this presentation and not in your memo. It is a, you know, the verbal agreement to that shall, is that sufficient for this review? Since it's not specific, everything else is specifically called out but that shall is not. Well, Andrew, I think, so here's, we didn't actually condition the project the last time we met. So when we go to do vote on this, we'll ask Andrew to reread all of the conditions that were proposed again to make sure they're included. And if there is any public comment between now and when we do that, that has an additional request beyond what the email correspondence we received through iLegisly, then that would be something that we may alter within the condition that we already kind of have present. Does that make sense? Oh, yeah, yeah. And I'm, yeah, my question, yeah, I'm not concerned necessarily about that, that comment and the public comment versus this, but just the procedureally, since there is a shelver and a consider for both of this, but that's gonna be covered later when we condition it. Then that's great by me. Thanks, Andrew. And then question for the applicant. The materials that you have, so in the memo, it's called out as the, as Matt finished, but also earthy and terracotta. I don't necessarily see the grays and greens as earthy. That's, well, necessarily, that could be a comment. You know, I'm okay with what you got, but the material that you've called out and I've been specifying, the colors, is there a whole palette of colors that you can choose from? Is it, did you choose this gray and green in particular? What's the question again? I'm sorry. The materials that you chose for the Matt materials, chose the green, the gray and green in particular out of a palette of colors available for this material? I can't speak for my design architect. He took the comments that we gave him. It's okay. I think this is Jim too. I think the answer to that is yes, right? If you're looking at the material board, you see the first two on the left, the gray and the more earthy green, those are what are applied in the renderings as the skin, which would be the preferred material palette. Okay. Yeah, the examples that we included were terracotta, bronze, and quartet, and these colors are not in that palette, but just a question about your material choice. Thanks for answering. That's all. Sure. Yeah, and just to clarify on that one point, we did try and stick with some level of the original design intent, but take reduced reflectivity, incorporate earthy, and put Matt as well. And so that was the final result. Well, yeah, and I appreciate the inclusion of the Matt materials. So yeah, and thanks for the answer. So I'm actually going to jump in here. Sorry. So Danny, are you aware of the manufacturer of the panels? I'm assuming it's probably a Lucobon, maybe given the names that I saw on the color board there, but they're an aluminum composite panel, right? Right, we're going to use the skin is going to be aluminum. That's correct. And it'll probably be textured as well, which will reduce reflectivity. So I think, so tied to this, I'm kind of interested in, this is obviously a passion project for you. You've been working on it for a while. So I'm curious like, originally you had something that was a little more kind of spaceshipy, right? And it had a high level of reflectivity and kind of a very modern aesthetic, right? I'm interested to hear more about kind of where that came from and where your own personal design feelings come from, I guess regarding the skin of the building, if you could address that, that'd be great. Yeah, I mean, I think our intent was always to keep it matte aluminum panels. We always wanted aluminum panels. We just decided to matte out and go more earth Tony. We just called out, all right, we're going to go matte material, textured and then we decided to go with the greens and the grays instead of what we had before. So I don't think our intent was ever to make it a shiny building, but I think based on comments we received last time, we just try to more present and more focus on, yeah, this is what we're doing. We are doing aluminum matte panels. I'm going to, I want to raise my hand real quick. I just, yeah, go right ahead. The presentation, I just want to get really clear. There's an applicant presentation 7-1-21 in the documents and it's dated 7-15 and there's a pearl white panel. And I, is that what we saw last time? And then there's another, there's a 7-12-21 set of documents. There's also dated 7-15 on the documents themselves and it has a cooler, what appears to be a cooler gray though, I was having trouble tracking down the specific panel manufacturing colors. So I'm just curious because both of the, both of the decks are dated 7-15. One is market pearl white and one is for the upper building color. One is cadet gray, which is a cooler gray. So I'm just, I'm trying to understand just exactly what's being proposed since the color boards have the same date but the, maybe that's a question for staff and I'm sorry to jump ahead. I'm just trying to understand what's being proposed. Yeah, and this is Jim Pugh, I can answer that. It's a good question, right? Cause it's confusing. So the last attachment on the agenda which is labeled applicant presentation dated 7-12, 2021. That is what's before you today. The 7-1 deck, you can just disregard that. That was submitted, but that wasn't the final. And so the 7-12 deck is what is before you today. And last point, the 7-1 deck is not what was submitted before. So the first time you saw the project, June 3rd was different. 7-1 was an iteration in between then and now which is 7-12. So yes, confusing, but 7-12 is where the board should be focused. That's great. That's appreciated and process is really important. And I think I'll jump back out until we get down to B on the list, but I just wanted to see if we get clarity on that. Thank you. Yeah, and to just wrap this up, I think even better. It looks to me like attachment 18, which is the actual project plan set matches the applicant presentation, which is the very last item labeled 7-12, 21. So cool. So Adam, any other questions? We kind of interrupted you when you were going there. No, that should do it. And I thank you guys for also jumping in with the clarifying questions. Thanks everybody. Cool, so we're gonna go to board member McHugh now. No additional questions. Oh, sorry. Okay, well, since John's under questions, we'll go to Andrew. Sure. I do want to follow up on board member Birch's question and your clarification. When we, so I fully understand that the 7-12 slide deck is what we're looking at and that attachment 18, which is the project plan set that is supported by the 7-12 presentation is what we're looking at. However, when we go to the material schedule on, which would be page five of attachment 18, we are seeing the market pearl white. We're not seeing a cadet gray. We're not seeing any greens. And so I do want to be sure that because as we move into project considerations for a resolution, we would be referring to the project plan set and not to the presentation deck. So I do want to be sure that we resolve any discrepancy there so that staff has clear direction going forward. Thank you. Thanks so much, Andrew. You're 100% right. I think we could condition this to have the material board match the plan set or we could figure that out. Great, thank you. Okay, where were we? Board member Birch, you're up. Yeah, that was my primary question. I've got that sorted out now. I understand the interim nature and also looking at the material schedule. So that was my primary question for staff and I do not have questions of the applicant. So. Thanks, vice chair Hedgepeth, any questions? Just first thing in appreciation about the actual packets and what is intended to be by the applicant to be the material selection to your point and perhaps board member Birch's. There are several companies. You asked the question, Chairman Weigel, about manufacturers. There's Alcabon, there's this company called, this is called Vanco and these companies that make reinforced aluminum. It has a backing, there's several parties and as you know, with four vehicles, there are different colors and so forth. This Vanco has Jade and like there's GE-11. So there's also other more earthen colors but it's hopeful on one step. And if I was to just kind of step up the stairs to clarity, the applicant presentation actually has underneath it the word gloss on a color. And so the word matte seems to be a condition everyone is down for, everyone is all in on that. I just wanted to note my echo or my understanding here that the quest for color selection is grounded in clarifying the applicant package colors and having conditions or referrals, comments that center around the conversation there is all. Excellent. And I guess I don't have any questions either but it seems to me based on the names of the colors that we're looking at Alucabon as a manufacturer. So if anybody's curious about their other colors as we discussed this, Alucabon to USA is their website Alucabondusa.com. So with that, we're done with questions and comments. We'll now open the public hearing. And so we're looking for members of the public to make specific comments on this project and this project alone. So Patty. Thank you, Chair Weigel. Just waiting for hands to go up. We have a lot of people in attendance, it's like 17. So with some of those, I think are probably public. So far, my hands have gone up. Oh, some, okay, a hand just went up. So we have Linda, Mettish. And we need to get the timer up and then you can unmute and begin your appearance. And then as a reminder to Ms. Mettish as she speaks, please state your name and your relationship to the project if you live next door, you live across the street. Typically we do an address as well, so that's up to you. Hi, I actually live on T. Berry Street. My name is Linda, Mettish is the last name and I live on the corner of T. Berry Street that is very adjacent to this new development. And I also have a concern about the color palette. In the last meeting, we talked about things like the DMs and earthy and muted and very matte. I hope if you guys have not had a chance to visit this area, you realize that we have an open field behind us. So matte is very important for reflectivity when it becomes a situation of like a full moon. So I am concerned that Danny and people are still going to the gray as opposed to the county earth tones. And I just like that consideration to be thought out. And also when we talked about the property, one of the things I'm going to call the best time to see the same kind of living skin and maybe have some texture to that as opposed to an industrial part of the building, that also would be nice to have a consideration. Thank you for your time and thank you for spending so much time on this. Thanks so much, Ms. Mettish. Seeing no other hands, I'm going to ask the recording secretary if we have any voicemails at city hall. I did not receive any voicemails and I did not get any messages from Andrew about voicemails. So I don't think we have anything. Awesome. And there were no additional emails either. Awesome. So seeing no more hands and there are no more public comments, we will close the public hearing at this time and then we'll bring it back to the board. And before we entertain a motion, I'd like Andrew to please read the conditions that we had from the last meeting, all of them, because we'll need to add them all in officially this time around. So Andrew, could you please read the conditions from the last meeting? Sure. So in addition to the standard conditions of approval that are contained in all design review board resolutions, condition number seven was added. This preliminary design review shall be valid for a four year period. If the permit has not been exercised within 48 months following the date on which the permit was granted, this approval shall automatically expire and shall be invalid unless an application for extension is filed prior to expiration. Condition number eight, if exercised within the initial extended approval period in accordance with all conditions of approval, this preliminary design review shall be valid for the duration of the use. Condition nine, shall diversify the heritage tree selection with use of valley oak. Condition 10, consider additional tree pallet diversity through use of, for example, desert willow, black maple, toilet and shrub, northern California walnut, California flannel bush, western redbud, and California buckeye, et cetera, for both structure and beauty. Condition 11, applicants shall provide details for utility building and guard building, including plan and exterior elevations. Condition 12, applicants shall include exterior elevation for garbage enclosure. Condition 13, applicants shall provide fence design details and fence materials. Consider material alternatives such as cord and steel that will weather naturally. And to condition 14, applicants shall reduce reflectiveness of aluminum skin and provide a pallet that is earthy and natural. Thank you, Andrew. So I guess at this time, I'd like to remind everybody we do have three options again, approval, denial, or we can continue it, although I believe the applicant would like to seek, I think they're seeking approval tonight. Is that correct, applicant? Yeah, this is Jim Puder from Shepherd Mullen on behalf of the applicant. Absolutely, we've been at this for four years, second time design reviewer. Absolutely seeking the approval tonight. And one point of clarification on the conditions that were just read out. The items that were adjusted between last design review board and this one, such as reduce the reflectivity, and I think there was one other one, we've done that. So those conditions I wouldn't see as carrying forward to the ultimate approval because they were already handled, but that was the correct resuscitation of the condition. So we do see your approval tonight. All right, and I agree, yeah. It's just good to read, kind of see where we've been, so we can figure out where we need to go. Thank you. Yeah, no problem. And so I'll leave it to the board here to make a motion as they see fit. I'll make a motion to resolution of design review board of the city of Santa Rosa, granting preliminary design review approval for the Santa Rosa Farm Group LLC cannabis facility consisting of a new construction of a 116,700-foot-square industrial building located at 800 Yolanda Avenue, APN 044-091063 file number PRJ-17002, 068-DR17-078, and wave further reading of the text. Excellent, thank you board member McHugh. Can I hear us? Do I get a second on that from anybody? I will second that to move things forward. Excellent, so hearing a motion and a second, we'll go back to the board for comment on the project and we'll go alphabetically, starting with board member Birch and go that way and then Warren, your last, unfortunately, your position as vice chair. So Michael, let's start with you and your comments on the project and you're muted. Just as a quick reminder, this is the host. If you're not muting yourselves, we often mute you because we wanna only have one person unmuted at a time. So please remain muted if you're not speaking. Thank you. Often it's good that I'm muted. In this case, I think you guys need to hear from me so. I'm confident about staff's ability to handle the comments around planting. Those were clear. I think when we do get to approving a resolution on the project, real confident staff can handle many of these things. I get, if the lighting is indeed in the lighting schedule, I believe staff can make those things happen. There are clear renderings of the fences and I guess for the level of approval that we're giving today, that is adequate. Staff does a great job with making sure that things get done. I'm excited to drive down the street and see that fence to be honest with you. It's interesting. It's innovative. I love three materials horizontally. And I think there's enough information in this plan set for staff to carry that through. As far as the building color goes, I'm disappointed with the response. Quite frankly, the interim selection of the market pearl white was more interesting to me than the cadet gray for the top of the building. Danny, you or your architect could have walked in and told us that that was the fog that rolls in through the Petaluma gap and into Pengrove and there was a representation of that level. The cadet gray is really cool. It is also very highly reflective. If you look at the Lucubon site relative to lots of the other colors. And let me see, is the cadet gray the base or was the cadet gray the final choice? In any case, the gray green is just still on the edge of sort of a panzer gray from World War II. It is just a little cool for me. Just flipping through the Lucubon site and some others that I looked at when I was reviewing the drawings. If it's pretty straightforward to look for the reflectivity and I don't think that we're necessarily into the matte range at all with the two materials that are called out if they are indeed a Lucubon. I don't know if there's... And Michael, just so you know, I was just checking for you. The cadet gray is the upper and the castle gray is the lower. The castle gray is still awfully cool. They're not really meeting the lower end of a Lucubon scale for matte versus gloss. And what is in fact quite glossy. I think that the pure white was like a 50 up to a 50 on the gloss scale. And the castle gray is only or the cadet gray is only down to like a 30 or something like that. So anyway, I just don't think we're there on color. I don't know if there's a brand recognition that you're looking for. We have these discussions a lot of times with when we're talking about prototype restaurants and that sort of thing where there's a reluctance to change a color scheme because of commercial recognition. I'm not sure that we have that here. I do feel like being a good neighbor and being a good entry to the city and representing sort of the public voice of the city, which is this board and those folks who do give comment to this board is really important. There's a wonderful variety of colors in several systems as we've talked about. This goes completely against the grain for me to sit as a, to sit as a design review board member and try to dictate the color of your building to somebody. But I just am not sure that there was an understanding or that the message got through from our last meeting. So I'll just sort of put that stake in the ground. I'm not sure what my other board members think, but that's just to start off the comments. Good with everything, still just really complete, just really not satisfied about the color selection, the reflectivity. I wanna throw one other thing out. I do a lot of work with the Luka Bond. I'm still not convinced about the ability to score this organic line across the Luka Bond panels. I think it's gonna be cutting them. It's expensive. I hope that that's what you're prepared to do. I don't believe that ordering pattern to Luka Bond that's partially coated one color and the other is possible. So I'm skeptical about that. I just wanna throw that out there also. So those are my comments. Thanks, Michael. Let's see, where are we? Board Member McHugh and you're muted, John. Whatever he said. Well, I'd just like to defer my comments till later. If I can, please. No, totally okay. We can do you at the end before Vice Chair Hedgefeth. Totally okay. So we'll go to Board Member Sharon now. Thank you. And I won't repeat Board Member Burch's early comments and kind of the bulk of the comments, actually. Early comments of just satisfying a lot of the conditions that we look for, if it was satisfactory and great. My question before about the material choice and the color palette range and what was available. Yeah, similar to Michael's comment I did wonder if the message got through the, one of the things that we were commenting on and reacting about was kind of that spaceship field, the gray and the silver. And that has been carried through. And so I think Michael had a good point of wondering if there is a specific brand that you're going for that you need to stick to for this, that you're tied to the grays and the silvers with earthy, what we were trying to say, at least what I was trying to say, I won't speak for everyone else, but in our Board's comments, we mentioned the terracotta and the terracotta color heathered and even the public commenter picked up on the, talking about the de Jong, something that could weather and have a patina. The earthiness that I think we were going for and what you're trying to do in your design is to reference the hillsides that are around there that are the backdrop to this. I mean, one of the things about this part of town and that we've gotten comments upon this and have talked about it in terms of across the street with the developments that we'll even talk about later today with 38 North or the other developments there and other developments along this corridor is one of the main things that the residents really enjoy about living in this section of town is being in that, that liminal zone between the urban city and then transitioning into the natural pallet, the natural world beyond the city limits there. You've got Taylor Mountain, you've got, you know, Annadel and Bennett Valley off in the background and then far away, you've got a mountain. And so having that pallet, having those views are really important to them. Having this, you know, the silver and tall feel going into that viewshed, one, I think the, you know, the swoops that you have to reference those hillsides are very interesting. I feel like you've got the swoops backwards though. And I wonder if that's kind of going also towards the feel of the color pallet. The swoops kind of should be going the opposite way, coming from the West and going towards the East like you're rising from the center as a plane and moving up into the oak woodlands and the grasslands of Taylor Mountain specifically right behind there. And I think that when we were talking about earth tones, we were thinking of browns, golds, taupe, the dark greens of the oak trees, those heritage trees. Looking at that, I think one of the, some of the reactions that you're getting to both your color pallet and will be situated with that specifically that North Eastern corner is that it's kind of sticking out. It's being placed and sticking out there. And so a lot of these comments are figuring out ways where you can blend in better. You can meld in better. Michael mentioned something about if you had talked about the design intention of the fog rolling in that's a really matte cool gray that you can go with. The silver aluminum skin is not necessarily, doesn't quite fit with the feel. So yeah, I think that unfortunately, I think this misses the mark in terms of what we were talking about in terms of having the building situated more with a sense of place. I understand you want to have it be distinctive and it's a very distinctive building and there's some really nice details that do fit in. I think with your mural and the images you've got are really great, but those are lower and they're more made for the building inside the building itself. We're looking kind of at the public face, which is a really important public face. So yeah, it's unfortunate what has been brought back to us in terms of color and material choices. So those will do it for my comments. Thank you. Thanks, Adam. We'll go to board member Wicks now. Thank you, Chairman Weigel. Could I get the page seven of the applicant presentation 712 brought up on screen. Love to talk to pictures. Too bad you don't have your laser pointer, right? I wish I had my laser pointer for sure. And while we're on the subject of colors, I mean, here's a prime example of why we need to get back in the chamber so we can pass around colors and feel the texture, feel, you know, see if it's truly non-reflective. I mean, this is a really tough call from a remote location, but I think it's important that we get it right tonight because this is a 55 foot tall building. Four and a half storage. We're looking at a project category corner from it that this will, well, not dwarf it, but it's as big or bigger. So if we could get to the material color board, which I think is on page seven. Yeah, thank you very much. And if I had my laser pointer, I'd be pointing at picture two from the bottom row of the second picture in from the left, rather. To me, to me that where it says local landscaping, that picture kind of represents to me what I thought we were gonna get back from terracotta earth tone colors. You know, even green can be earthy. I think the castle gray is a little drab and I think the cadet gray is way too cool. And I think the colors are a huge swing and a miss for me and I would not want to hear some more comment and some dialogue on this, but there's so many great things about this project. I love the fencing, I love the mural aspects. Thank you for addressing most of the other concerns. I go back to a board member Sharon to make sure that the landscaping things were addressed properly for that condition that we asked be done. But I think short of the colors, I think this project is probably ready to move on. That's what I'd like to say about the project at the moment. But again, like a board member McKee and I'd love to jump back in after we hear some further dialogue from our chairman and vice chair and our new board member. So with that being said, let's go to board member Wolski. Thank you. Yeah, I'm kind of jumping into this when a lot of it has already been processed and went back to the old information, looked at the new and I was surprised at the color choices. So the scene that the majority of the DRB requested bronze or Corten and those types of materials and I didn't see those. So that was a little surprising. And I wanted to address the parking lot lighting and I read there was a couple of public comments on that. I'm completely fine with it. These light standards are shielded. They're downward facing. They're only 15 feet tall. When most light poles are more like 20 or taller and this is in the parking lot. They're going to have customers and employees who need to be safe. So I'm completely okay with the lighting. That's self elevation with I think board member Sharon called them swoops. For me personally, that was a little too fanciful for me and made the building stick out in a way that I didn't like but those are my comments. Thanks Sheila and John, do you want to go after Warren or after me or you're muted by the way. So just give me a thumbs up if you want to go after Warren. Okay, you won't go after Warren. All right, let's do Warren and then maybe we'll do John and then maybe I'll go last. So Warren, you're up. Thank you, Chairman Weigel. Well, I really appreciate collectively here this building is very close. I appreciate the motion in an attempt and an effort. I'm going to go out on the limb here firstly thanking the board here to source and look at this color chart. I'm trying to be a friend to all but a friend primarily to the city as well. There's been some very important comments about where the building is located, what the board had felt about it being this kind of a more of a world gateway. And I too was, I was frustrated with what happened with the colors because it seemed to be something I'm not sure what it was. Yes, the building is spectacular. It's so spectacular that it can have a quieter skin. I really picked up on board member Birch's comment about the technical ability to fuse colors on senior panels. I think a little bit, I'm going to go to zoology. When you look at a reptile or a fish, the scales there, they don't have swoops between scales as much. It's just the color shift is in the scale. I would be perfectly happy with two colors where we don't have the diagonal swoop. It's just a stair step. You manufacture and cook and bake the two colors and how they meet can be a foray of something more glaucomic where there's a scatter or just a stair step, like a ladder effect, riser run tread. I think it would be a more successful building there. I'm going to take a risk here and going on the look-a-bond site. Here is, I'm going to make sure I do this right. Here are some colors and everyone can see these. What I've done is I've gone in here and I've taken a blue marker, right? Okay, if everyone can bear with me, you're going to see two colors. They both have blotches. They have love hearts and they have two blotches. These two colors, the slightly rosier one, and I'll just say this, is a Sierra sand and a light bronze anodized. I don't believe this is an italic famer. I was anything that says Micah or metallic. Sometimes I'm even worried the word terracotta is metallic, but in order to not make this too deep, too rust barrel, like a deep tin can in respect, perhaps the applicant, the light bronze anodized is still, it's a very deep, taupey color. So I know that this is not, according to Henry, this is definitely class B for communication, but I will just say that those two colors, in my mind, there's a depth and an earthiness to both, and I would be okay just throwing over the bow of the ship the petition that they have a warmth, both of them, they're not cold. I think the comments about the green kind of missing the mark, it's just kind of a strange, it's still a cool green. The light bronze anodized and the Sierra sand is my vote, and I'm concerned the hazelnut Micah is, if it's metallic, I won't buy it, but that's a third option maybe at the base. I was almost willing before this meeting started to say, let's just go with one color for the whole thing and call it because it's a strong enough building, that here what I'm trying to do is say, we're in the lane of a manufacturer, we're gonna get in the lane of warmth, we're gonna get in the lane of two colors. They're not gonna be too screamingly terracotta because I don't think that's what the applicant wants, but they gotta be warm, much warmer. So I'm agreeing, we train Andrew Tupel and all the other comments about trees, lighting. I'm a go there that if the desire is to pass this tonight, you're gonna hate me for the rest of your life, or you're going to say maybe this is a lane that you're okay with that it's just my try at bridging, hoping for some level and not colors are extremely sensitive things. And you never make friends with each color, at least you'll lose a couple, but maybe game 10. So that's my report. Thanks, Warren, and we'll go back to, oh, Michael. Yeah, go ahead, Michael. So does anyone remember the newlywed game? Okay. More or less, I also had light bronze metallic, which is reading backwards there, which I thought was a great color from that palette. I'm probably more into the more dramatic of the couple because I paired that with terracotta. I think your rose color is great. It's definitely gonna make less contrast, but the light bronze metallic is a gorgeous color to pick up the hills there. It's very rich. I think it could be a good centering point for being darker and dramatic or being a bit more red in the other direction, but we did go 50-50 on our list here. Thanks, and we'll go to Jeff. Oh, sorry. Go ahead, Adam. I'm in there. Also with the newlywed game, I also had the light bronze anodized, the light bronze metallic. So that's three for three right there, but I was going off of Warren's comment about the warmth and the green with the second color. The olivey metallic is nice, but it could be heavy, but the metallic raises flags, but the epernaise champagne metallic also. Worried about the metallic, but this is again, it would love to see these in person, but I think having some bit of contrast from a brown and a green or brown and a gray could be really nice, but anybody else choose the light bronze anodized? So John, we'll go to you now. Well, thank you. What I'm concerned about is, of these 14 conditions that we have, we're all in agreement on 13 of them. And we're coming down now to the skin of the building, and it's like writing a speech with a committee. Our subjective judgment, I'm just concerned that we may never get this thing resolved, or we'll have to continue it again. And I'm concerned about the applicant. And I think the applicant has made a reasonable attempt to come to some resolution of the situation with regard to the skin of the building. And I think maybe we're going just a little bit too far and a little bit too hard on what our own subjective judgments are about how it ought to look. And so that's what I'm concerned about. And I'm hopeful that we can get this thing resolved this evening so that the applicant doesn't have to come back and go through this machination again about colors and shapes, and this and that. And that's what my comment is. I'm just worried about that. I just think it is non-productive. And I don't know that it's helpful in any way for the reputation and the status of this board. I'm sorry, I just don't think we can do this by committee. Thank you. Thanks, John, appreciate your comments. So I guess it's my turn, right? So I actually disagree with my design colleagues. But that's okay, I'm allowed to. I actually think that aluminum composite panels are the complete wrong material for this project. But that being said, if the applicant has a desire to use aluminum composite panels, then that is their preference and right. But I think the reason I have a problem with aluminum composite panels specifically for this project, and I think tied to what everybody else has been talking about and what we heard from the public, is that the project's in a really prominent location. And aluminum composite panels are limited by the palette available from the manufacturer. And I think what I'm hearing from my fellow board members, but also my own, I guess, personal tastes, is that a material that weathers naturally with the landscape around it, seems to me to be the best solution to create the sort of dramatic effect that the applicant wants. So if you have two materials that are just similar from one another, and one would be the rolling hills and one would potentially be something behind it, that the rolling hill component could weather in one fashion and be a very organic thing and tie the building to the landscape around it. Maybe that's quartz and steel, maybe it's perforated copper, something like that that weathers with a patina. And maybe in fact, everything behind it is an aluminum panel that's in a color that works with that. So those are my thoughts on this, on the potential solution to try to help, I think deal with this. I think the biggest problem when we're talking about color is we're limited to the manufacturer that's been selected, right? Instead of, I think very often when we see projects that have stucco, hardy siding, brick even, CMU, painted metal, there's a lot of flexibility within how those materials interact and how they can change color and create color and change depth and things and texture when you have a monolithic material that's limited to a color palette, it doesn't leave a lot of flexibility. I think that's the problem I'm having with the color section. I think I like the building, I like the setbacks, I love how it's situated on the site, I love how cognizant the applicant was to the neighbors around. I mean, I think there are so many great things about this project and I think selecting aluminum panels actually kind of kneecapped you a little bit in terms of reaching the full potential of what is a great project. If the board disagrees with me, totally okay and we can go with their direction but I did wanna mention that as an option to maybe find a solution that is a little different that gets you out of a material that we can potentially condition if you're okay. I know there's, and I think the other thing too to what Michael was talking about is aluminum panels are not exactly cheap and if you start cutting them into some other things there's some costs, there's some significant costs associated with that and so this is a big building, it's gonna be expensive as it is. So I guess I have a fear of losing the design intent that the applicant wants in terms of that rolling hill and kind of speaking to the landscape around it. So those are, and then I did have one other comment Andrew just about the fence actually was more of a question to Danny. The fence is shown is like that green, that castle gray in all of the plans I should have asked this earlier is the plan to have the concrete and the metal castle gray and then those horizontal tubes in a different color? Yeah, the fence will be a different color than the building itself. Okay, so, but you know what color that will be or is it just kind of gotta be green-ish as it's shown? Yeah, I mean, what you see in the renderings is what we're gonna aim for. Cool, thanks so much Danny. And Andrew, you had a comment? Chair, we were just wondering if perhaps there's been a lot of incredible feedback about the quality of the design, the importance of the building at this location. And from staff's perspective, it really seems that we're down to perhaps consideration of color. And, but then you've introduced the idea that perhaps the cladding system could be rethought. So we were wondering if it might be appropriate to open it up for the applicant to respond to some of the ideas presented and get a sense of where the applicant team might be with some of these design options. Well, you beat me to it, Andrew. I was actually gonna do that once I finished up there. But I was gonna go back, just ask if anybody had any final comments based on what John had said and what Warren had said. If anything, if something else came to mind and then we'll go back, we'll go to the applicant. I just wanna say one thing. Chairman Weigel, and that was that in the floor, in the writing of the Declaration of Independence collectively, I do agree that we can potentially look at something here. And I just wanted to honor, I wanted to defer to, or remember Birch in his comments that I am not locked in, I'm not obsessed, but I just wanted to note in the dating game world that I stand with Chairman Birch in that, in the cause of events of this board, in the cause of human history, this could be done. Thank you. Thanks, Warren. Henry, you had a comment? Well, I'd like the applicant, when we get comments back from them to give us some confidence that the split color panel, they've gotten samples from a Luca bond or whoever their manufacturer is and just give us some confidence, they can pull that wave off, which I personally kinda like. If there isn't a blending at the line or how that actually happens, how two colors get either put in an oven and baked on or the electro, you know, when it's painted with the electrolysis, how that happens and do they have a sample? Could they show us something? I went online to try to find something online, couldn't find it, so I'd like to hear from the applicant on that specific. Cool, and it looks like Michael has something that he's muted. Should I respond to that question now? Danny, let's just, let's finish the board comments and then we'll go to you guys for sure. Sound good? Thanks. I just wanna say one thing. You know, I really was careful being leading off to make sure that I expressed my concern and my actual kind of like the fear of diving in to try and to select the color of an applicant's building. I'm on the other side of the table most of the time. And, you know, you get strange moments where, you know, a board member somewhere says, I just don't like the color green and you've got to work with that, right? I think the situation's a little bit different and I don't wanna lose sight of the fact, Danny and the board that the project is great, the massing of the building, the murals, the attention to detail around the base, et cetera, et cetera. But this issue is bigger than just sort of, it's bigger than that. It's, you know, it's, what's the old line? Oh, but how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln? You know, it's like, it is the important thing. We're gonna end up with a 55 foot tall building that's visible from as far south as, you know, Wheeler's Zamoronee when you come over, when you crest the hill coming from Rotor Park. And you're gonna continue to be surrounded by a residential and this tail end of a light industrial zone that used to blend into agricultural land, it's just, it is a transitional zone, it's changing, we wanna be a good neighbor. So I wanted, I feel like a project of this scale, putting this delicately, a project of this scale requires an applicant to have a design professional who can respond to comments from a group of designers who are appointed by the community to, to represent the community in terms of what the city looks like and carefully work with transitions between zoning uses and neighborhoods and that sort of thing. So without too much social engineering going on here, I think like Warren said that we should take on the task of helping if, you know, we don't have your architect tonight. And I'm not suggesting, Danny, that you're not capable as the applicant of making some of these decisions. But I just, again, go back to the very first thing I said, I don't think the comments were necessarily heard. And if we can help, I'd like to extend that branch to say, let's work on something that we can all get to. Drew, you know, you're kind of at the other end of the spectrum with better solutions. John, I understand the idea that the idea that this is a slippery slope. And I feel, I'm on that slippery slope, I feel it. But I think that if we can find a spot where we can create some ranges or pick some colors or agree to some things here, we can get to a resolution and this project can move forward and it's going to be to the benefit of the community. So that would be my thought. Thanks, Michael, Adam. Yeah, just one last thought, again, to commend you on a great project. Excited to see this built and you've done a great job so far. I think one thing that'll help in framing your answers to our questions. And one thing I wanted to hear before, if you frame a little bit of time and tent. So Adam, some of that cut out, I think maybe start over. Oh, OK. Well, did you hear me say good job and thank you for the project and hope to see it built? Yeah, your comments cut out. I think that was critical. Yeah, sure, sure. So yes, thank you for that. I want to make certain to say that. But yes, I think one of the things that will help us frame it for you to frame your comments and answering us that I would like to hear specifically about is attention to your design intent. You've kind of stuck with some things through our comments in the previous meeting and to now. And so I think one of the reasons why we're reacting to the colors and the materials is you've stuck with a certain aesthetic. And I think hearing some of your specific design intent will really help us with that. So just kind of more explanation. Thanks. So I think, Danny, let's go back to you. And I think Mr. Pugh, but we'll start with Danny. I think the first question that I think Henry asked was about have you seen samples of a Luka bond or whatever panel manufacturer you're using? I think that, right, Henry? That was something you were concerned about. Let's get Danny to speak to that. It's the bicolor panels for the swoop. Yeah, the bicolor panel. Biceps panel, specifically. Yeah, I don't think we're going to be able to find, like you said, panels that are two-tongued. But I'm confident that we can put them together like puzzle pieces. And I agree. I think that the way my architect divided that massing, right, it's a big wall. I understand that. It's a big building. But the way he divided to break it up, I think looks good. I like it. And again, I'm confident that we could put those different color panels at an angle, just like puzzle pieces. OK. I guess if you or Mr. Pugh have any other commentary about some of the comments you've heard tonight, that'd be great. Right. It's Jim Pugh from Shepherd Mullen representing the applicant. A couple points, right? Because this is getting very subjective. And I want to kind of harken back to the last meeting and let all of the members know, right, if you look at the minutes from that meeting, which is what we did, in addition to our own detailed notes, we looked at, for example, recommendation number eight in your minutes. The applicant shall reduce the reflectiveness of the aluminum skin and provide a palette that is earthy and natural. If you pull up any color wheel or simply Google earthy colors, the exact colors that are on the building and in the plan are in the earthy and natural color tone. So I think there's a bit of overreach here going on. And that brings me to my second point, which is more legal. And I don't even want to bring this up, but being a lawyer and seeing where this is going, you have to recognize the bounds of the design review board review, right? It's set forth in your code, right? And it says, the review authority shall do certain things. The best chance the DRV has is, you know, harkening into design review guidelines to talk about color. And even there, you have to stay within the zone, right? Which is an industrial zone. So I'm only pointing that out to try and get to a solution that's not I like blue, she likes green, right? We have to stay within the confines of your code and your design guidelines, which we think we have done. So at some point, I think the members need to decide whether they want to push beyond that or reflect upon the applicant's color choice, which is their prerogative as being sufficient to meet the code and the design guidelines, which we think it is. And again, I'll kind of wrap up with this point, which is we tried to do what you said. There was a lot of talk in the deliberation about we missed the message, but if you literally read the minutes and you look at the tones that were referenced, that's what we chose. And we also took the too hard, you know, reduced reflectivity. That's a big deal. So we went map, right? If that needs to be clarified in some way on the plans, that's fine, but we thought earthy yet modern industrial and blending yet with the surroundings in a map tone is what you got. So we're here to get an approval and hopefully we can. But that's my initial thoughts. I'd like to chime in or piggyback what Jim said. First of all, I appreciate the, you know, we got a lot of positive feedback and I appreciate that. And I think that this is going to be a great project for everyone. The, you know, my goal, I'm gonna go back to the trees now. I am kind of a earth person. My goal is to use the grassy island in front of the building to make a collage of all the recommended plants that you guys are recommending. I think that's gonna look stunning. And again, to just kind of firm up, you know, Jim's point, in the last meeting, to be honest, I was resistive to what, you know, going with a earth tone color till I sat with my design team and he showed me, you know, different options on earth tones, but we did do exactly what you guys told us in the last meeting. We did exactly that. So, you know, I would like to build a building that everybody's gonna like. I would love to do that. Is everybody gonna like it or at least the colors? That's not possible, right? Because that's not how it works. I'm open to, you know, changes. I'm not drawing a hard line on anything. Our goal is just to get approval. If the building is gray or bronze or so many other recommendations, it's not a deal breaker for me, but when does that process end? Because for me, I don't see seven people in any room going to agree on a color that they all like. So, you know, that's pretty much it. I'll, you know, I appreciate the feedback, but I don't, you know, I really, my intent from the beginning of this project was to be a good applicant, be a good neighbor. You know, I had a barbecue. I moved the building away from Linda's house because I get that she doesn't want to stare at a 55-foot wall. I've always operated like that. But I think at this point, you know, let's figure out how to get this done. I would really appreciate that. Thanks, Danny. We appreciate that too. You know, I think, I apologize. I think board member Birch did put it fairly well. You know, this, you know, generally speaking, you know, well, I think we as a board, you know, if something seems out of place, we'll comment on it. Colors, massing, things like that. And we'll make recommendations. Very rarely do I think we really put our foot down about certain things. I think I could count on one hand the number of times I've been heavy-handed about a couple of things regarding a couple of projects. So what I think is as good as I'm gonna, I'm gonna read a couple of things out of design guidelines, help the board out maybe, see if we can kind of move this forward a little bit. So design guidelines, business and light industrial parks and buildings. There is a section on colors and materials. B four, sorry, no, B three, it says highly reflective materials are discouraged. So just to point that out, I think another one in here is select building colors to establish continuity and compatibility. And this is specific to within an industrial park. Then it goes on and talks about colors should enhance the visual character of the environment of the proposed building. I think that's the item that I think I, I was when it was shiny and gray, that's the item that I kind of had a hiccup on. But I don't think you're doing some of the other elements here. It says building colors should not compete for attention. I don't think that's happening. Building colors should not become signing or signage for the building or site. I don't think that's happening either. And then it talks about integral coloring and stuff, which is pretty standard. That's B one. So I mean, there are some items in here within the design guidelines that do allow us purview over color. I think the biggest thing I'm hearing from everybody is that the colors as they stand are competing with the landscape around it. I think that's what I'm hearing the most from everybody. The other thing I'm summarizing. Can you clarify that though? I mean, because there's a mis, some things getting miscommunicated and we want to get a solution. So when you say, and I agree with your read on the design guidelines, but like the continuity and competing with the environment, we're looking at green grass and occasionally a blue sky and then some grayish cloudy sky, right? We have gray and green. I mean, so, and I'm not just speaking as the lawyer, like we talked to our architect, we talked to the designer, it's their recommendations to take those palettes and say blend it to the environment. Green and gray, which is, so we're kind of defuddled. We need clarity. For sure. And I think that's what, we're going to try to get there. I was going to summarize just some of the other comments I heard. See if we wanted to add or delete some of the conditions because I want to get you to approval. And so that's where I'm trying to go here. So what I'd like to do is I think, I think we can delete item 11, 12 and 13 out of the conditions that were in the draft resolution since those have been met. So, and that's Jim, what you were talking about the plans and all sorts of those things that were- Correct, I appreciate that. Yeah, yeah. So I think we can delete, I think it's a, hang on. Ah, I zoomed past it. I thought it was 11, which is a utility building, a guard building. 12 is the garbage enclosure and 13 is the fence details and fence materials. And then 14, I think is the one that we're going to have to work with. But we'll come back to that. I did hear a comment about flipping the mountain swoop. Was there anybody else besides Adam that felt one way or the other about that? I just want to be able to cross it off. And nobody felt strong about the swoop, the mountain, where it's located. You have to do it. No, okay, cool. All right. And that's fine too. That was nearly a thought on that too. Yeah, yeah, totally. Place, thank you. And then Danny kind of addressed this about the ability to cut the panels. He's fairly confident that that can happen. So I think it's not an issue. So then I heard a number of comments about this and I wonder if this is what may help drive us to a color maybe or maybe at least a condition. I don't know. That the building is situated with a sense of place and reflects the nature and space of the adjacent land around it. So that's a comment I heard in kind of various veins from a couple of folks. I don't know how to condition that, but I wanted to remind everybody of it because that would be the only kind of big thing I heard is. So situated that the building be situated with a sense of place to reflect the nature and space of the adjacent land around it. So that's what I heard. Do we, does anybody wanna try to take a stab at rewriting item 14, which would then become item 11? Or maybe actually, let me take a step back. So the tree thing, item number nine, I think this is probably gonna be an easy one to deal with. Item number nine was talking about the diversity of the heritage tree selection. And I guess that was with regard to the trees along the south edge of the property. And then I guess there was a public comment that those all become evergreens. So I guess I'd like to ask the applicant, Danny, do you have a problem with that? If, you know, getting rid of live oaks or valley oaks that are prone to disease and picking another tree, do you care or are you attached to valley oaks? I mean, you're saying replaced valley oak with heritage trees, you know. No, no, no, so there's a whole palette of heritage trees in the city of Santa Rosa. I think Adam can probably speak better to that. But basically the comment from the public was they're prone to disease, particularly in this area, could we replace it with another evergreen? Is that correct or am I messing that up? No, there are evergreen heritage trees, but I don't see a need to throw out the plant palette that they have and within the design that is there. Partially evergreen, we're talking conifers, most likely, but these are evergreen heritage trees. Valley oaks are deciduous, but they do have the structure. Coast live oaks, they are evergreen, but they are not deciduous. A lot of these other ones, the Toyons and the, you know, the flannel bush, they are evergreen trees. And so I don't necessarily see the need for our applicant to throw out the plant palette of what's here. I think introducing a monoculture of say redwoods would be, I would object to that. If the applicant came with that, I would object to that. I would like to go with the diversity that they represented in their plans. And Danny mentioned that even just a moment ago, I wanted to bring in that diversity of the plant palette in front, and I think that's really great. From my viewpoint, the nine and 10 are satisfied, and I would go with what we have. I just, like I said, Andrew had a comment on that. I just wanted to make sure that those were buttoned up and good to go, because that's easy to check off. Okay, so does anybody want to take a stab at this color business? Maybe board member Birch looks like you're unmuted. Appreciate entirely the attorney's view here. And I've suggested several times that it is a slippery slope to go down, but with an applicant it's non-responsive to a comment. I'm not sure that, I'm not sure what your opinion or Danny's opinion or your architect's opinion is of the differences between worms and neutrals, but the cadet gray is essentially the color of the shale that's on the site right now. The reflectivity of the panels is in the, that you've selected for a luke bond is in the sort of mid range or above mid range of reflectivity. So if your architect has served you poorly in making selections, that is unfortunate. I don't know if a simple solution here, and it's just the kind of solution that I absolutely hate. On the luke bond website, there is a choice of cool, neutral and warm. Both the colors that are selected are in the neutral category. You simply have to push the buttons and select colors from the warm palette if you want a simple solution here. At a certain point, gray and such is not exactly subjective. That's me speaking as a designer who works in those areas every day. I don't think we're looking for seven people to agree here. I think we're looking to have the applicant bring a solution that meets the recommendations of a board that generally wanted to address a 55 foot tall building that's in a transitional zone between residential, rural and industrial zones. So I think it's pretty straightforward. I hate to see you guys come back. I never want to come back. I do this often. I'm on the other side, but I do think we need to get to a solution. If it's selecting colors or if it's selecting a range of colors or something of that nature that we can pass on and move along the staff to take care of, the problem is gonna be, and this is what's tough, the problem is gonna be that if we leave this straight rolling mountain line on your drawing and we approve it tonight and we select a couple of colors or a range of colors that staff can't approve because you can't do the straight curve line or you pick different colors later, it's gonna end up back to us anyway, not by our fold, but just by the nature of the approval process. So the best thing to do is I think if we just come to some agreement tonight about a color from this palette, which would be fairly straightforward, I asked the question, if you were beholden to a brand identity, which also is drew red in the design guidelines is not allowed either. So I think we can get there. I don't think it's that hard. I think it's a matter of if, I think it's asking the applicant if these are colors that are near and dear or can we do this? I don't like this. I don't like this idea of us sticking colors on the building, but the colors that have been brought forward are not acceptable to this board and I can see this board continuing again or tonight. So that's my defense. Yeah. Board, I could appreciate the color comments. I want this building to look as good as possible and to please the residents of Santa Rosa as much as possible. I'm not, maybe I think one board member said that they liked our middle rendering that was a draft version, but I'm okay with that color. I think it was a white and the light green or maybe just to kind of get this going, let's have Andrew put an earth tone color palette on the screen and let's decide. I mean, I think the building is going to look great, no matter what color we put, but I obviously want to get the board's support and then we could, I don't know what the legal way of conditioning it, Jim will chime in on that, but let me know if that older version pleases the board. I thought those colors were cool too. I mean, you got the white on the top, like the kind of blending it with the clouds and then the bottom half could be, and I know people didn't really like the green, but right next to me is a grassy field, right? So again, our intent when we did have a design huddle was to comply with what you guys told us last time. All right, so thanks, Danny, appreciate that. John, I think, did you have a comment before we go to Warren, or I saw you raising your hand there, so. That was inadvertent, so now you go to Warren and then. All right, thanks John, appreciate you. Warren, you're up. Thank you, Chairman Weigel. I really felt something that appeared quite sincere about perhaps staff coming up with some earth tone colors that what excited me was that here's a big building, here's a party who's coming into our community, and there is a emotion here to look at community concern and still have an exciting project. I know this is a very esoteric conversation, but it's one where we've heard some very grounded truths. Most of the year, our grass isn't green. It's green for about two and a half months. It's been burning out now in late April, more than June, but I love the idea, and this came from the applicant. It's aspiring to me, it's kind of a triumph of a thought that we could bring us some earth tone colors, and that's coming from the applicant to move things along, and I think that's worth the risk. Sounds good, I do want to point out one thing, kind of I was just looking at the old Google Earth. Funny enough, the building that's across the street, I think it's a shipping facility is like a beige and then a pink terracotta. Since we were talking about no pink terracotta right earlier. So Bill, do you have a comment since you're showing up on my screen here? Yeah, yeah, I've been listening to everything, and I first just want to say thank you to the board. I think this has been a great discussion. It's also been a discussion that feels very familiar to me and probably to many of the board members here. Colors do come into play. They're a discussion point on many projects. What I'm wondering, what I'm hearing, and what I'm wondering if maybe we can distill it down to a little finer point is often this type of discussion and results in a suggestion, a range, a consider you're directing the applicant to maybe go a little bit further in one direction or another than what they presented. It's not uncommon at all. I'm wondering if we can do that, get to that consensus that's generally what we're looking for, something that can have a motion, a second vote, a passing vote. I think what I'm also hearing is a desire on both parties, the board, the applicant, certainly staff is to move this project forward. It's been in for quite some time. But I think what we need is that condition language present it right to the applicant and his attorney to see if that is sufficient and see if they accept that. That's a courtesy that this board has extended applicants. It's not always the case. Sometimes once the comment period's closed you can take an action and it moves forward, but that's how this board treats the applicants. I would get to that point. And if it's not acceptable, then the other options are certainly continuance and then there's always denial and that can be appealed. So I just wanted to kind of summarize that, bring the board back to that point, but I feel confident we're getting close to that and then we should just present it to the applicant. So let's get a little just quick straw poll, raise your hand so I can see in the screen here. If you'd like Andrew to bring up the Alucabon website for us, just if we think that's a good idea, I think Warren mentioned it, Michael mentioned it. So if we, so can I get a hand raise? I'm seeing five, okay, cool. So Andrew, can we go ahead and bring up the Alucabon USA website please? A-L-U-C-O-B-O-N-D-U-S-A, awesome. And then you see that little drop down there that says temperature up there, let's click warm. Boom, all right. So, yeah, let's zoom out a little bit so we can see them all. I think the bottom row is all bright stuff, but yeah. There's a red fire and a carb red all the way at the bottom. I think those are not on part of the discussion. Everybody agree with that? Yeah, they're out. They're out, yeah, that's what I would think too. Although the Tuscan Sun is on the building right now, it is a very nice, very nice color. And let us not forget that. It's in some of the detailed areas, kind of a fun pop. So I think I'd like to turn this back over to I think Vice Chair Hedgepeth and maybe Board Member Birch to maybe lead this discussion a little bit to see what they're thinking. Maybe we'll do a little, like they said, dating game matchup, pick a couple of colors, see, do a little straw poll, see what the board thinks. And go from there, does that sound like a good path forward to everybody? All right, Warren. Quick interjection, is the architect available online? The architect, unfortunately, cannot make the meeting for personal reasons. I apologize about that. Yeah, because I'm kind of, and I heard Board Member Birch kind of allude to it. It's a difficult position. And I'll go along with this, but I just think us picking colors for an architect or the design team, I'd almost like to hear from the design team, which colors they would like, but. Warren? Yeah, I don't know, this is kind of, Henry, I agree with you, but in the same breath, you and I are architects, Warren's an architect. We all know that if our client overrides us and says they want chartreuse or they want purple, what do we have to do? We got to put chartreuse or purple on our building, right? So ultimately, Danny's the decision maker in this instance, right? And so I think we've got designers at the table here and if Danny's comfortable with this, which he alluded to, we can take a stab at this, give him a couple of options, ask him what he thinks and maybe we can give him a range and try to condition this to move him forward. I think that's maybe the best path forward. I have a question on this process right now is I'm hoping we're not getting to just two colors. We're getting to that kind of range. I don't necessarily wanna handcuff them to two colors. No, but we can't, what we can't do, I think, and Bill and Andrew can maybe back me up on this one is we can't say pick a warm color because that doesn't really give staff a great direction. We can say pick a warm color in between medium anodized bronze and light anodized bronze that has a reflectivity value listed less than 25 on the website or whatever, right? Like we can, I think we can put our arms around it that way. Yeah, that would be appreciated. I think the applicant's attorney, I think I don't wanna speak to him, but I think that's what he was kind of alluding to is some specificity is what is in order as much as we can. Short of picking the exact color, a range would be helpful. As we've said in the past, staff's very confident. We can carry that forward and take these conditions to completion and to satisfy the board's interests. But yeah, that range would be very helpful. Yeah, and I can concur with that. What we're looking for is a condition that can be satisfied, right? We saw what happened when we read the minutes and got neutral and earthy and we tried to. So I'm fine with a range of colors to be able to demonstrate upon permit issuance, right? That range is in the design. And then of course, Danny is the decision maker. I'm glad someone pointed that out. And we would like a flexible range, if you will. I understand warm, but we also wanna reflect the colors that are in the community year round. Yep, so I'm gonna turn this over to Warren and let him drive the bus here for a little bit on these colors. So Warren. Okay, thank you. Looking at a range and be mindful that the cheeks of all these walls at the ground floor, as we move from our toes and our ankles up to our kneecaps on the site, there are those colors that would follow. If the base was a deeper color and it lightened at the top, just be mindful that what we're here about is shopping carting that color palette as well. I'm just gonna say that if you look at the top four rows, the fourth row down, the shopping cart is the second color from the right. That's the, maybe the Sierra sand. The Sierra sand is the one color, I would say, in that row that could be a go. Then you look up from there on the next row up. Just about, if you took that whole row, obviously the harvest go Micah, these wood tones, they're simulated wood, I don't believe are in the wheelhouse of modern design, but anything that doesn't have a wood grain, one of them is even kind of all of it, but I'll just say that row three at the bottom, that the non wood grains in that, that's four colors there. And then the second row from the top, outside of the garnet metallic, that's a no. The shopping cart for Hazel is there the bronze, it's not metallic, that's in your shopping cart. The native copper Micah and the terracotta. If Colorado gold was an option, as you said, Chairman Weigel was an option against the, the brighter one at the bottom, that's a consideration. But then the entire top row there, these are all earth tones. And I don't necessarily, the driftwood Micah is a little cool for me. So if you shop in cart at least five of the top there, maybe killed the fourth one, you've got a kind of earthy nature now. I mean, that's a cache of colors. And thank you for starting with a worm, but those are my thoughts as far as diversity and I don't think there'd be a trainwreck if any of those colors were a consideration working somehow. Those are my comments. Yeah, I'd like to chime in if I could. You know, I, A, I'd like to, you know, again, you guys agree this should be arranged. B, I don't know if I should be held to just one manufacturer. I'm okay with just looking at this particular manufacturer because this is what we have right now, but, you know, I'd like that to be part of the deal where it's, I can, we can commit to this palette, right? But, you know, we have to say, hey, it's going to be similar to the colors we choose because it might be a different manufacturer, right? What if another manufacturer has a similar color that's half the price? So I just want to make that point. Thank you. Oh, that's a really good point, Danny. I think we can write this condition in such a way that gives you the flexibility to shop manufacturers, right? You're obviously, if you don't have to pay the most expensive price for an aluminum panel, you find one that performs the same exact and it's half the price, like you said, why wouldn't you buy that? So I think we can find a way to say, you know, based on the submitted color palette, you know, here's the range per the Alucabon manufacturer, but other manufacturers with similar color palettes are permitted or something like, you know, we could find a way to write that up, I think. I have a suggestion too, and Andrew might be going to the same spot. I wouldn't be opposed to if we could land on a palette which seems like it's a selection of sorts of what's on the screen, you may be able to attach that as an exhibit and make a more simple condition that says, you know, to be chosen from the attachment, you know, to the, referenced in the condition, you know, and then you can literally just have the colors, right? And you can go from there, but that's just a suggestion. Chair, I was going to comment that with regard to flexibility across various product types, there's several, you know, software programs out there that can do color matching, can divine RGB values and compare across RGB values. So I think that it would be fairly easy for, you know, really any design firm to be able to do a comparison if we provide a palette as described by Mr. Pugh, and then they go with a different manufacturer, they could still do a color match and find one that's within the ranges of the palette that's provided. So I'm very comfortable being able to work through differences between product types. Excellent. All right, does anybody have, so what I heard from Moran was light bronze anodized, Sierra sand, harvest gold mica, hazelnut mica, medium bronze anodized and driftwood mica could I get that all Moran? I believe so. Yes, I left out the wood grain ones because that's not an authentic world, that this is a more contemporary building that it doesn't need to simulate nature that appropriately. Yeah, I would leave the wood grains out too. So I guess maybe how I would write this and maybe Michael can help me, you could say like, Ali, are you watching this? Of the five colors, we could list them lightest to darkest. Yes, they're sort of roomy. And then say for lower and for upper, I don't know, what do you think, Michael? Yeah, I'm not to throw, not to add to this, but I do appreciate Moran's comment that the mountain shape could be achieved with very clever effervescence of the colors as well versus a straight line, I'd rather see an honest sort of material functionality driven way to express that than necessarily just straight line done poorly. That said, I think that regardless, when we get into this color range, I don't know what belongs on top and what's the bottom, but I do think that the distinction between the two colors could just be worth, you know, to work in this range with a design that is in line with the presentation representing you know, the hills, it just, it gets to be a lot. I think what you're talking about is we could do a consider that gives some flexibility to his design team that would allow them to move forward and not come back to us, right? Like let's say they find out, they can't cut the panel, right, like then we're gonna see it again. So in order to help them out, I think we can find a way to condition that helps them out. Yeah. But I think that writing it as the color range for the upper and lower, I'm not so interested in what's light and dark above and below. There architect is gonna be able to work in this color range and I think create something that's really stunning and this is, you know, what the board has asked for was this range of colors in this area. So whether there's dark on top or light, dark seems more obvious on the bottom. That's very sort of traditional of building design. So I think that that range, so just writing that up as the range within which the two colors needs to be selected would be great. This is Jim Pugh, I'd like to add one point and I'm not the architect or the designers, you guys are better at that of course and qualified. But one thing I wanna point out is when we select a range, which I agree with, making sure that there's some gradation in light to dark, right? If you look at the top row of what's on the screen, it's relatively consistent, right? So the massing of a building of this size will need some lighter shades or some differentiation in shades to be able to break it up a little bit. So the designers can comment on that before but I've seen plenty of buildings when you get a certain mass, you need to break it up with other color or architectural feature. So we're asking that you provide some level of flexibility in the shading range to alleviate that massing issue. Could we include some conditioning of contrasting colors in terms of light and dark, something like that? That's kind of what I was going at. Something in the range that allows you to use that color range to help massing, which is what we were trying to accomplish in the first place. Yeah, I think writing something about gradation might provide the most flexibility for your designer, your architect, in so much as, I think if we say the upper must be light and the lower must be dark, but then maybe you find that swoop can't be done, well, then maybe you're hemmed in there, right? So if we say something to the effect of the gradation of the panels from the top of the building down will increase in darkness or something like that, that might be the way to handle that. And then with the additional consideration of about the design saying that something about that allows us to not have the fabricated edge, if it becomes pixelated, I think that kind of Warren and Henry and Michael kind of talked about kind of eroding that a little bit and creating that pixelation between, you could potentially even introduce a third color to create that, I mean, but that's up to him, right? But I think giving him the flexibility to do that. I think one other thing I wanna come in is perhaps this anodic satin Micah Warren as well as a potential gray for them to pursue next there to teach wood, what do you think about that? Just gives them six colors, I think. I'd agree with that. That gives them another lighter range color for the top part of the building. And that top row is pretty dark and even the hazelnut and the harvest gold Micah get onto good base colors and we're not really giving them enough range for the top color. Yeah, and the other thing I noticed is I went into all of these and I looked at the gloss levels. Pretty much all of these that we've picked have a gloss level of 30 or less. But then if you look at the Argonite Metallica as an example, that has a gloss of 70 to 80. So as an example, just to give you a perspective about that, so I think we could write something about the gloss level being less than 30 as indicated, something like that, preferential to a matte finish, something along those lines. So you're looking at the Anotic Satin Micah that set your shopping cart. In addition to your list, yeah. Yes, 10-4. Anotic Satin Micah. 10-4. Yeah, this is Jim Q. Again, we appreciate that. That's helping the range there. One other comment for the board to consider is considering that we specifically designed the entire site to sit, you know, within that open space, you know, green field to the undeveloped side, is there any desire on the board's part to include some level of what is this olive or metallic or something that gets into the greens a little bit to reflect the open space that we kept at the other side of the site? I think what I heard from Warren is our grass is not green most of the time now, right? We have green grass, what, two months out of the year? If that, if we're lucky. And our rolling hills are much more a varying shade of brown most of the time. Yeah, I'm saying that just because of the existing state of Yolanda, you know, and if you get a heavy dark building there, I don't know, again, something in the range of some tone of green, all right? Just for the transitionary nature of the site. I mean, I think the medium bronze anodized is gonna give you maybe a little bit of a green. I mean, I think going somewhere with olive and metallic, just my opinion is gonna, it's like too much green. That's like army green, right? I think the medium bronze anodized might give you a little bit of a green hue, depending on what's adjacent to it. It's just my opinion. So I wanna go over the list here one more time and get a straw poll if everybody's cool with this. Light bronze anodized, we should have the bottom row on the left. Sierra sand, bottom row, second from the right. Harvest gold Micah, one up from Sierra sand. Hazelnut Micah, one up from harvest gold Micah. Driftwood Micah, top row, third from the right. And medium bronze anodized, sorry, medium brown anodized right next to driftwood Micah. And then I think that does it. Oh, anodic satin Micah, bottom row, third from the left. So is everybody cool with that? Give me a thumbs up. John, Sheila, Michael, okay, awesome. Medium brown anodized, so that's seven colors. That seemed good to the applicant team. Danny. On, kind of piggybacking what Jim said, just to kind of, and kind of, you know, what some of the board members said, to do a light and a darker color. And then going back to our first version of this that we didn't end up using, could we get like some type of white, like a, you know, not a straight white, but like a grayish white. I know that the, I know the Aragonite metallic, is that on there, Aragonite metallic? So I think, yeah, it is. I think the problem with that, Danny, just this is my opinion, if you, Andrew, could you click that real quick? Sure. So if you go down here, see how it says gloss value, 70 to 80. So the higher the gloss value, the glossier the material. And actually below that is the solar reflective index, which is ridiculously high. So I don't know if you've ever been on like a white TPO roof. You have to wear sunglasses to actually go on that, if it's, if the sun's beaming down. So the same thing would happen here on the side of your building, you'd have to wear sunglasses so you wouldn't be blinded by the white panel. Does that make sense? Yeah, no, it makes absolute sense. Could we focus on the colors opposed, I don't mind having a range on the gloss rating, if it has to be 30 or less, you know, but I just like to have the option. I know my architect, if he was here, would like that, just to have something that gives us a range in the whites, if possible. This isn't the one, right? But maybe the one, could we pull up the panel again, please? And I would say the market pearl white, it's in the neutral family there, and I double checked it. And it's got a gloss value max of 25, is the board okay with that? I have the request of the applicant to give some flexibility to the architect, or is that a color that you guys aren't interested in seeing? This is partially my question, where I wanted to hear some of the design intent and initial where you were going. And I wonder if we give this the option of the white, I mean, that's where you've wanted to go, you've wanted to go with silver and aluminum and white this entire time. And if we go with that option, I mean, it's kind of what you've wanted. So, and we're recommending the earthy tones, the browns, the topes, the sands. Yeah, I wasn't necessarily thinking just a straight white, and it's hard to describe what's on colors sometimes, but more like a cream, like a matte cream. Again, it's not really about clicking on these things and seeing the gloss rating, it's just about looking at the color and then finding the color that goes within the gloss rating that we want, et cetera. So, I'm not asking for a white, but maybe just almost like a creamish, maybe a light gray. That oyster that's up on the screen kind of fits that build, is that what you're looking for? Yeah, I mean, I think someone made a pearl white recommendation, can we look at the palette again and obviously we'll go with what the board likes, but. So, Danny, I was mentioning the market pearl white is out, is in the neutral palette, and I think we've heard from Warren and Michael about maybe staying in the warm palette. Okay. So, the market pearl white may not fit that build, but the oysters certainly might, if I see some consensus from the board to add to the palette we've created here for you. So, I'd just like to turn it over to them and see what their thoughts are. My comments about the pearl white earlier was, it was a little more of an esoteric kind of design discussion comment, which was to say, tell me a story about the fog, but it's not necessarily what we've asked for or what we're looking for. So, I just, I look for logic in design strategy, and I was surprised you could have entertained that thought, but I don't think it's right given what we had asked for. I think we're headed down the right path with the seven colors that have been defined. I agree. I think the whole contrast situation is because of the wealth of deeper colors, the contrast of the lighter that we have, if you compare the palette we have, there is certainly optimistic lighter colors in that palette. I'm concerned about accents here and they're blowing an uncertain trumpet. So, I'm in agreement with board member Birch. Yeah, I mean, let me know the lightest color that the board is comfortable with, because again, I'm just trying to give the architect as much flexibility as possible. If you guys see one that would be acceptable, I would appreciate that. I think the Sierra sand is that color. It's an eight to 12 productivity. It's got a slight texture to it. It seems to- Well, we also added the anodic satin mica as well. That's really the lightest. A little bit cooler, you got that. Can I see that color, please? Which one is that? Anodic satin mica. Oh, sure, okay. Right next, yeah, there you go. And I think the crux of some of this is that we're also trying to avoid going very light, very white. Okay, I'll accept the, yeah, I'm fine with those seven. I don't know how many we have, but the options at the board likes, I'm fine with that. Our message from Santa Rosa is you are at choice. We aren't emphatically brittle or thorny. There is a way for you to express yourself in our community within hopeful, collective community. I appreciate that, I can appreciate that, thank you. Chair Weigl, I've been documenting the color selections and the gloss values. So I have that information available in the form of- Yeah, I've been trying to think about, I've been pondering how to write this up. Does anybody, did anybody scribble on how to condition this besides me? Chair, I do have two draft conditions, so. Well, maybe I'll try mine and see what the board thinks. And if it totally doesn't work, then we'll go to you. So what I was thinking about here, based on what I'm hearing from you guys is shall provide exterior aluminum panel cladding from the following range of warm colors. And that we would read off oyster, light bronze, anodized sierra sand, harvest gold mica, hazelnut mica, driftwood mica, anodic satin mica, and medium bronze anodized. And then we would say gloss value, not to exceed 30. Because I believe that's the max on all these guys. Not to exceed 30, with a gloss value, not to exceed 30, with a preference for the lower value, for a lower value, maybe. Here we go. I think that's it. Yeah, sorry to interrupt. As Andrew mentioned, he's been jotting it down. And I think we're pretty close with what you just summarized. If you'd like, we can read that into record and see if it covers everything. Yeah, yeah, let's try yours. Okay. I was trying there. Yeah. Andrew, do you want to read it or do you want me to read it? You're muted, Andrew. So drafting while the board was discussing, the draft is building color selection, Shelby derived from, and similar to, these Alucabond USA colors, driftwood mica, medium bronze anodized, hazelnut mica, harvest gold mica, light bronze anodized, anodic satin mica, and Sierra sand. These colors are available at alucabondusa.com forward slash samples.html. A second condition would be building material finish, Shelby derived from, or similar to, Alucabond USA gloss value equal to third year less and consistent with a flat matte for non-reflective finish. These gloss values are available at alucabondusa.com forward slash samples.html. I do want to, I did notice something. I want to make sure we're clear on this because I think the building base, the accent panel, and the two accent colors don't meet those criteria. And I think we need to exempt them from that, just in case maybe you don't see it, Andrew or something, you know, because I think we all like the dusty charcoal and we all like the Tuscan sun, where they're indicated on the building. But if we were to, the way that's currently read, it encompasses those. And I think just in your first one, maybe it says excluding building base and accent panels as proposed. Is everybody else cool with that? Because I just want to make sure we don't change the cool colors that the applicant has. Yeah, I appreciate that. Thank you. That's a good point. Yeah, and this is Jim Pude. I would suggest instead of referencing a manufacturer, we just say from the color palette range, you know, either attached or listed, but I'm a little wary of the board having to suggest a manufacturer and then getting into some type of favoritism or other things like that. It's safer for everybody not to list a manufacturer. From speaking from the staff's position, if I don't have a manufacturer reference, then driftwood mica, for example, means nothing. So the condition was crafted derived from or similar to so that we could use those as a starting point in the event that you use a different color from a different manufacturer. Maybe a medium ground, Andrew, and board is to instead of reference a manufacturer, just attach the color palette that we're talking about. I think that the way Andrew has it drafted, it's attached by default. He has the link indicated, so it will be essentially part of that. And as Andrew's indicated, it's just a reference point through color eye detector or some other technology. We'd be able to match this as close as possible to another manufacturer. So I would say that from the staff perspective, we feel confident that we're achieving both the board's goals and also I think what we're hearing from the applicant as well. Yeah, I agree with that. As long as you make sure there's no obligation to buy from that manufacturer. I think we're saying the same thing. Okay, so, all right, let's bring this back to the board here. Okay, Andrew, did you happen to bang anything out about the transition at all? Or the, I didn't hear the gradient kind of component in there either. Oh, yes, I did. So, is that the next one, the next condition you have? I'm getting confused on my mutes. So I can add it as a separate condition. I had actually added it to condition number 11, talking about the colors and then saying excluding building base and accent panels as proposed. But I could separate that out as a standalone condition, which I think would be more clear for staff if it was to be a standalone condition. In terms of the gradient from light to dark or the exclusion of the colors? The exclusion. Sorry, can you reread your condition 11? Sorry, I'm being difficult, I apologize. No, no, no, it's totally fine. I definitely want to get this right. So, building color selection shall be derived from and similar to these Alucabond USA colors, driftwood mica, medium bronze anodized, hazelnut mica, harvest gold mica, light bronze anodized, anodic satin mica and Sierra sand, excluding building base and accent panels as proposed. These colors are available at and then provide the Alucabond USA link. Okay, so let me, now that everybody's heard that again, I know I think Warren, Henry and Michael had some comments about the gradient component. Do you guys want to include it in this one or do you want to put it in its own condition? So obviously to give the applicants some flexibility with their design as well, like we were saying, if that hard line doesn't happen, we prefer not to see them and give staff the flexibility to give them an approval, right? We would concur with that. And a term that I see used a lot of substantial conformance with, right? So if you're conforming with the general design intent and palette, the staff can then decide about that, substantial conformance with. Feels like a separate condition just so that we can get the color right. And then that can be dealt with as well. I think it'll be easier for staff. Okay, so do we want to keep the excluding of the accent colors in the main one or do we want to separate out the accent colors? Also, it's a separate question, sorry. So if the, can I chime in for a second on the gradation? If the panel can't be split, if it changes, then it's coming back to us. Is that fair just for clarity? As it currently stands, yes, but I think what we're talking about is potentially creating a condition for the applicant that allows them to just keep moving forward if that can't happen from a manufacturing standpoint. Okay, so we'd be looking at a step panel that kind of pixelated the motion of the mountains. Correct. That's a tough one. It is the kind of thing, you know, I don't want to delay this tonight. I wanted to move forward. I appreciate one of our board members' comments about moving a project along. But at the same time, I think we'd be doing a, we wouldn't be doing our job if we didn't try to get it right. Okay, is there a consensus about at least providing some direction about light color on top, dark color on bottom? Okay, so that would be a separate item, Andrew, I think. And then I guess we, okay. I'm open to that. I think the applicant all along had that intent. You know, if you, in the great outdoors, as mountains recede, they get lighter. There's dark purple mountains and lighter and lighter ones as you see in the vistas. And I think everyone's in agreement that if the top was more toned down and the heaviness was on the bottom, it seems to resonate instinctually. Okay, so that'll be an additional condition about the gradient. And then I'm wondering, Andrew, how do you, how does staff feel about within substantial, whatever the lawyer said, whatever Jim said? Are you guys comfortable with that? Is that something that you're uncomfortable with as a staff? No, I think that, you know, in the draft conditions 11 and 12, I'd use the term and similar to, but I think we could change that term to shall be derived from, or be in substantial conformance with. And that would be a good instructed middle ground. Staff is very comfortable with substantial conformance. Okay, I think that sounds good to me too. If everybody, I think Henry was a dissenting voice on that maybe, but can I get a, can you read that Andrew back and then we'll get a little hand raise? Sure. See if that's okay. So draft condition 11, building color selection shall be derived from or in substantial conformance with a Lucabond USA colors driftwood mica, medium bronze anodized hazelnut mica, harvest gold mica, white bronze anodized, anodized satin mica, NCRS sand, excluding building base and accent panels as proposed. These colors are available at and then insert the LucabondUSA.com website. What's our next, our next one now? Then draft condition number 12, building material finish shall be derived from or in substantial conformance with a LucabondUSA gloss value equal to 30 or less and consistent with a flat matte or non-reflective finish. These gloss values are available at and then insert the LucabondUSA.com website. And then do you have a 13 about the gradient? So I started with 13 about the gradient, well about the ordering of building color. Building colors shall be ordered with lighter color above darker color. And that's as far as I had gotten on that. And I can't get too adequately describing the gradient. My thing muted me, I don't know why. Is everybody okay with 11 and 12 as they currently stand? Thumbs up from everybody? All right, perfect, awesome. Okay, and then we'll work on 13 here about the gradient. I think maybe Andrew, I would say kind of the way you started and then I would say insubstantial conformance with the proposed design intent or something like that to encompass the fact that they're gonna have the hump but if they can't cut it and they go pixelated, it's okay. How are you feeling about it so far? One suggestion, honorable chair would be able to say what you just said and then reference the plan set dated July 12th, if that's the one that's before you tonight and then that will give a reference point for staff if Andrew's okay with that to do this substantial conformance with the design intent as shown in and the date of the plan. Yeah, that's probably okay, but he's typing away over there so we'll wait to see what he comes up with and then we'll see if everybody's okay with that. And then while Andrew's typing, did anybody have any other comments about fencing, lighting, trees, anything else that we didn't hit that we need to make sure? I think conditional 11 covers the discrepancy and the plan set in terms of the gloss or mat that handles that that we talked about earlier but does anybody have any other final items they want incorporated? I just wanted to mention this is a courtesy for the applicant, pure and free form. They're HPD compliant aluminum panels, it's a whole range. It's there's no petroleum VOCs. It's a, they can be 177 inches long, but that's, I just want to put that out there for them pure and free form is an alternate site to look at to find expressive freedom in the earth tone world. Chair Weigel, I had just one, just wanted to clarify or just reiterate the, about the trees and that we are sticking with what we have and with the plan that was provided and not going with the evergreen suggestion. Yep, I think we're good. Perfect. On that one, yeah. So Andrew, you got a 13 for us. I do. Building colors shall be ordered with lighter color above darker color and design color transitions shall be in substantial conformance with the approach described in approved project documents. Okay. I mean, that sounds pretty good to me, but can I get a thumbs up, thumbs down from the board here to see if they're cool with that. Sheila and Warren. Is that some of those Sheila, Warren are good. Okay, cool. So it sounds like we've got a fair majority here on that one. I mean, less funny, anybody has a big dissenting opinion. So, and then Andrew, so we deleted the previous, just a little bit of housekeeping here. We deleted 11, 12 and 13 and 14 and we're replacing them with our new 11, 12, 13, correct? That's correct, yes. Okay. And everybody's heard the reading of 11, 12 and 13 as I've been read. Okay, so what we'll need to do then is we'll need a friendly amendment to the original motion that John made. And I believe Adam seconded to accept the new conditions as read by Planner Triple and then we'll do the approval from the motion or the seconder and then we'll hopefully do a vote. Does that sound good? Okay, so a friendly motion, friendly amendment from anybody? I'd like to propose a friendly amendment to the motion and the second to include Planner Triple's comments, weigh the reading of the text for the items as expressed. Excellent. So John, do you accept the friendly amendment? You're muted John, I need you, I'm muted, sorry. I accept the friendly amendment. Awesome, and then Adam. I do. You accept it? Great, okay, so now we're gonna kick it back just to the applicant to see if, before we take a vote, if they're cool with everything. Sheriff, before we do that, I did want to clarify that currently the resolution receives to, or refers to the final approved plans dated received March 27th, 2021, which would be the plan set that contains the site plan that was approved by planning commission. Then I think that we need to, and then it says accept as modified by the design review board at its meeting on, which would be today's date, but I think we need to reference attachment 18, which would be accept as modified by the project plan set dated received July 12th, 2021, and by design review board at its meeting on July 15, 2021. Yeah, I agree, but maybe let's do that after we just hear from the applicant real quick from Danny and Jim, if they're comfortable with everything, because in case we need to modify something. So Danny and Jim, are you guys comfortable with the conditions? I'm still here. Sorry. There you go. Yeah, there I am. It would be very helpful if Andrew could show the conditions. I mean, I know he read them, but it would be great if we could see him and read him. That would be helpful to me, and Jim. Oh, for sure. Andrew, can you throw those up on the screen? And while we're doing that, is everybody okay with modifying item? It's under the planning division item two, I believe, on the draft resolution. Is everybody okay with what Andrew proposed? Just quick thumbs up or thumbs down. Okay, cool. Andrew, I think they wanted to see the conditions of approval 11, 12, 13. Okay, so this is, yeah, planning division two by the prop. So I think that we gotta do a little friendly amendment to catch that one. But are you guys okay with that applicant team? That one just up there? I mean, it's okay, cool. All right, let's go down to 11, 12, 13 there, Andrew, and give them a minute to read this and then they can give us the yes or no if they're comfortable with it. This is Jim Pugh. I would only add one word as subject to Danny's further review of it, but it's in number 11 at the second line after USA colors. Do you think it would be better to say USA color palette? So we know we have a range here? I think we're, I think we've given a range through the use of those colors and the way that it's written, I think it gives staff like, I think what's gonna happen is, as long as you don't come in with like orange or something, right? Or teal, you're probably gonna be okay. Can you add that word then, range? Maybe it's with the Leucobon USA color range or something like that. Just so we're talking about a palette or a range. So I think it's really challenging to do that because then it gives more flexibility. I don't wanna make this harder. Just trying to make it better. I think it's gonna be challenging for staff. If they have a color chip that can look next to a color chip and I go, yeah, that's pretty dang close. Then, I think they'll be in good shape. Danny, you have a final word. More than that, you guys good? Everything looks good. Awesome. All right, so we'll do a, I'd like to entertain another friendly amendment to amend item two under planning as proposed by plan or triple. Can I get a motion for that friendly amendment? I'd like to make it from the amendment to embrace, clarify and secure Adam Trapell's most recent modifications has noted into the record that includes the site plan. Is that clear enough? That's good, Warren. Thanks, John. I accept the friendly amendment. And Adam? Yes, I accept. Okay, perfect. All right. So what that means is we're ready for a vote. So Patty, can I get a roll call? Okay, roll call vote. Board member Wicks. No. Board member Wolskie. Aye. Board member Sharon. Board member McHugh. Aye. Board member Birch. I'm sorry, I didn't catch your vote. No. Board member, okay. Vice-Chair Hitchcock. Aye. Chair Weigel. And Chair Weigel. I know I'm thinking, I'm sorry. I didn't think this would go the way it did. So I'm thinking for a minute, I apologize. Can you please mute yourselves when you're done? Yeah, I'm gonna go no. We have four ayes and three notes. So I believe the motion passes. Yes, correct? Yes, it passes. All right. So that being said, you guys have an approved project that's been conditioned. Thank you very much for your time. We appreciate it. And hopefully you'll be building a beautiful building on the south side of Santa Rosa here fairly soon. Thank you for your time. Yeah, thank you board for your hard work and I appreciate you guys making, you know, I don't know, almost three hours of time here to help me figure this out and get it across the finish line. Thank you. Have a good evening. Thanks so much, Danny and Jim, we appreciate your time as well and great building and look forward to seeing it. So with that item 8.1 is closed, Bill, I was thinking we would maybe take maybe a 10 minute, 15 minute recess, maybe does 7.30. Is that something? Yeah, that would be greatly appreciated. Okay, so let's take a recess till 7.30 and we'll see everybody back at 7.30. So we've got about three minutes. Just wanted to maybe see if everybody starts heading back so we can convene at 7.30. So just for any one, about three minutes. Okay, it's 7.30. Hopefully everybody's back and they could turn their cameras back on and we'll get rolling on item 8.2. So there we go. There we go. Just waiting for Warren and looks like. Wow, this group looks well fed and hydrated at this point. Well, bathroomed. Yes. Speaking of hydration. Well, considering the next item is a concept item, we can start without them. We do have corn. I can't, you're not letting me start my video. So ask, gotta be a host Maloney there. Host Maloney is banning me. Sorry about that, I suppose. You left without turning off your video so we had to turn it off one more. Okay, I knew it was me in the end. Okay. You're good now, I think I got you on me. Okay. All right. All right, let's get rockin' and rollin' here. Item 8.2, concept design review for 38 degrees north phase three, mitigated negative declaration of gendarmes. I have a screaming four year old, I apologize. I think her sister hit her. Sorry, mitigated negative declaration of gendarmes. 2660, Petaluma Hill Road, file number PRJ20011DR21025. And we will turn it over to staff for a staff presentation. Thank you, Chair Weigel. I'm gonna go ahead and open up this presentation. Oops. And while Planner Ross is doing that, we're gonna do staff presentation, applicant presentation, questions, comments, bada-bing bada-boom, sound good? Okay. And then we'll try to fit in some public comment in there too. Do you see the presentation correctly? We do, thanks, Adam. Just the presentation, right? Just the presentation, correct. Okay, excellent. All right. Well, thank you, Chair Weigel, members of the designer view board. I'm Adam Ross, Project Planner for the 38th Degrees North Phase III Project, which is before you tonight as a concept item. The project is located at 2660 Petaluma Hill Road, Petaluma Hill Road. The applicable file numbers are DR21-025 for the concept item and DR21-026, which is the major designer view, which will be back before the board at a future date. As a concept item, the purpose of the meeting is to provide an opportunity for non-biting comments from the DRB as to how the proposal may meet the city's development priorities. Hey, Adam, your page didn't switch. I heard you click in, but no page, so. So this is the second slide one that this is got. We're still on slide one. Let me. That's why I said something. Thank you. Give me just a few minutes to try and figure this out. So while Adam's doing that, everybody have a good snack while we had a break, hopefully, yeah. And I can read the slide, provide an opportunity for non-binding comments from the design review board as to how the proposed project may meet the city's development priorities. Reminder, there is no action being taken on the item tonight. So now you can start on page three, Adam. So are we on the third slide? Third slide, yeah. Okay. The 38 degrees north phase three project proposes construct 30 new multi-family units within two buildings, one being a 20 plex and the other being a 10 plex building with 46 new parking spaces, which requires a 23% parking reduction. At full build out, at full build out phase one through three are to operate as one community and will have access to all community amenities. This proposal does not affect the 2.54 acre open space preserve as provided in the previous phases of this development. As part of the 38 degrees phase two project, there was an approximately 1.29 acre parcel that was to be developed as a commercial shopping center as part of a separate application. You can see that location on the landscape side plan from phase two, which is here. Here you can see a portion of the general plan land use diagram where the location of the project denotes a community shopping center, as well as being within the CSC, commercial shopping center zoning district. However, after the approval of 38 degrees north phase two, the applicant conducted a market feasibility study, which concludes that the location cannot support a community shopping center. That market study was not included as part of the packet tonight, but as part of the project file being reviewed for the general plan and rezoning applications and as part of the public record. So you see the star, this is the location right here. The project as proposed requires a general plan diagram amendment, a rezoning application and a major design review application. The general plan plan diagram amendment and rezoning application is reviewed by the planning commission who then makes a recommendation to city council. City council is the final review authority for those entitlements. The major design review will be brought back to the design review board at a later date. On this slide, you will see an approximate location for phase three. And on the right side, you will see the site plan for phase three as proposed. So here's just like a general location of the aerial and here's the site plan for phase three. Here's a closeup of the site plan for phase three and you can see the entrance to the site shares an entrance with phase two. So right here off the farmer's line. Here's a view of both phase three and phase two and how they will be connected at build out. So here's phase two, which is already approved and here's phase three, which is under review tonight. Here's phase three on the site in context with phase one and phase two including the open space preserve, which is 2.54 acres. So here's the open space preserve. There's a pedestrian bridge that goes over it. Phase two, part of phase two as well. Here's phase one, which is already built and this is phase three, which is farmer's lane and Petaluma Hill road at the intersection, which is cat, catty corner to the previous project that you recently went through. So I'll go over these next few slides quickly since the applicant is prepared to discuss in greater detail. I'll hold them for one to three seconds each up until slide 20, some 3D renderings, 3D renderings, the 10 plex elevations and some more 3D renderings, some materials and a landscape plan, conceptual landscape plan. In the California Environment Equality Act, also known as CEQA, that analysis includes addendums to the previously adopted mitigated negative declarations for both phase one and phase two to support the rezoning and general plan diagram amendment applications, which would then incorporate the major designer view application. With that, that concludes staff's presentation. Again, I'm Adam Ross, project planner for the item before you tonight and I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Additionally, the applicant's presentation was mistakenly excluded from the agenda packet tonight. However, that presentation does not include any new information not otherwise presented in meeting item documents pertinent to this evening's review activity and it is now being introduced into the public record. Thank you and whenever you decide it's an appropriate time to start the applicant presentation, I will do so. Let's do it. Let's just roll right into their presentation and get them hooked up with speaking and whatnot and then we'll go back to the board for some questions, I think, maybe. Perfect. And so the applicant, just an FYI, when you need to change the slide, just let me know. Hello, this is Sean O'Brien. Can the design review board hear me? We can. Welcome, Sean. Thank you very much. On behalf of Kennedy Wilson, the project applicant, I'd like to introduce the project, 38 degrees north, phase three. As Adam kind of described, this is the last part of what is a three phase multifamily project on this site. When we entitled phase two last year through the design review board, we left this last one-ish acre parcel to be a future shopping center or something else. And so what we're now doing is we're pursuing re-entitling that parcel for the multifamily use, which was always kind of our intention, but just we had to take it in steps to get to where we are today. This presentation is mostly just rehashing the design packet or the architectural conceptual design packet. So let's see if you could just go to the next slide. Next slide, please. So basically what we have here is 30 units in a 20 plex and a 10 plex. The 20 plex is a building that we presented and got approved in the phase two entitlement process. And the 10 plex is basically just a half section of that 20 plex. So the only, I guess called elevation that this design review board hasn't seen would be the one face of the 10 plex. That was where the building was cut in half. It's tucked under parking. And we kind of designed the proposed project to function well with the existing phase two project, which I'll just let the design review board know we are currently in kind of the last steps of plan check for phase two with a target kind of construction start date here in the next one to two months. At least that's the goal right now. Next slide, please. Just a detailed kind of architectural site plan as Adam mentioned sits on the corner directly kitty corner to the project that was just reviewed by the design review board. Next slide. Just a quick history. We had a pre-app and neighborhood meeting in May and subsequently incorporated comments from that meeting into the concept design review submittal in parallel to the concept design review where the major design review decision is the general plan amendment and the rezone to basically allow this site to be all multifamily and eliminating the requirement for a community shopping center somewhere on this subject parcel. Multifamily is still an approved use of the parcel, but this is just to eliminate the requirement for the shopping center. Next slide. Next slide. Once again, you've probably seen this in the architectural packet, but here's a corner perspective of the project. Just to reiterate, these are the exact same buildings as what we're proposing at phase two or proposed at phase two, which are about to start construction, same exact color palette, same design, same building. Next slide. Another perspective from Petalum Hill Road. Next slide. I think that was Andrew Triple actually biking by. This is the 10 unit building with the new elevation on the right side that was developed for this project. Next slide. Once again, the color palette and the materials that were approved at phase two and will be built and we're just matching it here for these last two buildings. Next slide. Some elevations with a key of where those elevations occur. Next slide. Next slide, please. And the new 10 plex based off half of the 20 plex. Next slide. Phase one was just completed here towards the beginning of the year. It's fully leased up and it's this kind of gray area to the left. Amenities include a dog park, a resident garden, a tot lot of pool and a clubhouse fitness room and leasing facility. That leasing facility at phase one will serve the entirety of the project which will include phase two and future phase three. In addition at phase two, we also proposed in our building an additional clubhouse and fitness space and a second pool with hot tubs. So there's no shortage we feel of amenities and we've even kind of amp them up a little bit. And so phase three will kind of utilize those amenities and any tenant in any of the three phases has access to all the amenities through CCNRs. Next slide. And then these are just floor plans which are all in the design packet. Next slide. Next slide. Next slide. Next slide. That's it. So with that, thank you for your time and I'm here to answer any questions or respond to any comments. Thanks, Sean. We appreciate it. So I think what I'm gonna do now is, so typically during concept we open up the floor for public comment. It's not an official public hearing but we do like to hear from the public on these items. So we could turn it over to our public comment period. So if you are attending the meeting and you'd like to speak on this item, please raise your hand and the recording secretary will recognize you and then you have three minutes to speak on this item and this item only. Thank you, Chair Weigle. We're waiting for some hands to go up. Looks like we do have a few members of the public here. So if you raise electronic, raise your hand then we can give you the ability to unmute so you can do your public speaking. We're not seeing any raised hands at this time. Yep, seeing no hands go up. I'm gonna close public comment and we're gonna bring it back to the board and we're just gonna go through the board and we're gonna do questions and comments of the applicant and staff. So questions of applicant and staff and then comments to applicant on the project. Oh, sure, go ahead, Adam, you got a question? I'm sorry to interrupt. I did receive a, I was waiting to see if their public comment would be in but I did receive an email late this afternoon in regards to this project and I'd like to just summarize that into record for the board. Please do. Sure. So there, an email was received by a neighbor to the project site who has had some troubles regarding the construction activities and compliance with conditions of approval regarding dust abatement. And then in regards to the redesign, they're not supportive of the 30 units. They think it is unnecessary in this location as there are already other units being built and does not support the parking reduction of 23%. And then does not propose the project and that's it. Cool. I'm the board, the project. Yeah, yeah, I got you. Thanks, Adam, appreciate you. Whomever that was from, I would like to remind the public if you have an issue with a construction project near your residence or you see drive by it or whatever, please contact the city of Santa Rosa code enforcement division, I believe is correct and report the issue. I believe code enforcement works on reports of problems on construction sites and things like that. If they're not reported, they won't know about it. I believe that is that correct, Bill? Did I get that right? Couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you, Drew. Thanks, Bill, appreciate you. So then we're gonna go to the board here for questions of staff and the applicant and then any comments you have on the project. Hopefully we can plow through this pretty quick. And then hopefully everybody saw that I inquired about the market study and the previous proposal of the grocery store. I think I'm satisfied with the answer. So anyway, board member Wolskie. I think my, excuse me, my only comment or question I asked is the decorative wood look panel that's in this phase was that approved in phase two as well? Yes, that's correct. It's a, it's actually a fiber cement material, but it's the, it's the same material color manufacturer as what was proposed and approved at for phase two. Okay, thank you. Yeah. Thanks, Sheila. Board member Wicks. You'd like questions and comments both at the same time, Chairman? Just everything, all at once. Just hitting. All at once. Okay. I, one of the things I've always liked about this project and helps me get behind the parking reductions is it's always had a, an element to it that keeps you out of your car and walking to get something you might have forgotten at a big store or elsewhere. I've always liked the corner shopping component to this project. And I, you know, from a, from a design standpoint it looks just like phase two, which I think we kind of passed with flying colors, but for me losing that convenience component to be able to go from your apartment and walk through a retail component on the corner. I think is, is not the best land planning in my view. Lest we forget though that Target and all that stuff is like 1,200 feet away, right? 1,200 feet. Just to put it in perspective. Yeah, except you can't even see it on the perspective of the site plan that we've got. You know, it's 1,100 feet from the phase one corner. It's not 1,100 feet from these apartments. So if you want to walk a half a mile to go get a quart of milk or something else that might be a good retail operation in that location. Again, just strictly my opinion and the land planning and the master planning that has been proposed to us all along the way was for it to be retail. Don't bait and switch me with, oh, we've always intended to have this be residential. Okay, thanks, Henry, board member Sharon. Excuse me. Thank you. Thank you, Adam for your presentation. Thank you, applicant for bringing phase three to us. It's been a pleasure to see phase one being built and now occupied. It's really great to see that. Takes a long time to see a lot of the projects we approve get built. So it's really great to see that one being used. And I'm glad to hear that phase two is on its way as well. No questions, no real comments. They definitely enjoyed the phase two presentation. As Henry said, we approve that and this fits in with that. I do think Henry's got a point. There's something nice about the neighborhood element of having a corner store. Think a supermarket is overkill, but corner stores are nice. But as is, I think adding this housing to the neighborhood and to the project is a definite benefit. And so thank you for three great phases. Look forward to seeing this one built as well. Appreciate the open space preservation and continuing. So just wanted to put that in there. Still enjoy that open space preservation. So thank you for that. Thanks, Adam, board member McHugh. Still muted, John. I'm supportive of the project and we do desperately need housing in this city and I'm supportive of phase three. And very much appreciate the work the design review board has done in phase two. And so I really don't have any comments or suggestions relative to phase three. I'm just glad that it's moving forward and we're building the housing because we desperately need it. Thanks, John. Board member Birch. Yeah, the project is well done. Faces one and two are great. Phase three, great team. They've proven themselves for sure. The bait and switch annoys me. Our newest board member Wolski a couple of weeks ago, a month ago, talked about neighborhood stores and walkable neighborhoods and that sort of thing keeps people out of cars. I know the housing is a desperate shortage. I feel like we're passing this down the road to say that there's a target 1200 feet away from you is not the same as saying that you've got a, Strimmall's not a bad word. Strimmall can be okay. It can also just be a little bodega or something of that nature. I know it's not sexy from a development perspective, but there's going to be more development in this area. This is going to continue to grow. We're passing the buck down the road. Lola's is probably a half mile up the way there and we're not the planning commission, but I would like to register my thought that this feels like something that we have been told in phase one and two was gonna be commercial. It makes the whole project feel better. It's always been professionally done and presented at the same time we have heard about this commercial site through the previous iterations. And now it's no longer a place for folks in the community that are there and folks from this new community to walk to and it's noted. So we'll see where it goes and what project ends up picking it up or how it ends up being picked up. We need the housing, but we also need places for these people to not have to jump in their car for people to not have to shop at Target for mom and pop stores to be located. So great project. Those are my thoughts on the planning issues not germane to this conversation. So thanks Michael, vice chair Hitchpeth. You're up. Thank you. Julie noted it was Peter Calthorpe, I guess one of the top 20 people in the world for his time, who marked 2,500 feet as walkable America. He lived in a houseboat in Sausalito. The rest is history. He advised, I don't know, 40 states in America about pedestrian. I had a bike in college, walking college and as far as groceries and so forth. It's not a horrible stretch to Target. Just a side note that that is the yardstick as far as human people on foot still being comfortable as far as shopping. You know, having said that, it's noted that at one time it was presented the whole site was going to be commercial. We need housing a lot, a couple of other comments. There is a bus line here. This is the corner that has the bus stop. This is all market rate housing as I understand it. And as far as stewardship in the rental, whether stalls are unbundled or bundled, whether there's going to be a courtesy in the leasing that seeing a car lot are going into an impulsive buy of a car. That I have some premonition here that the stewardship of this is going to take into account and tether any kind of abundance of cars. Somehow there's going to be some management there. The smallest bodega you could consider, you could snip off obviously three stack units and hit a corner, but I'm just, I'm not going to go there on this. It's a situation where I'm through commenting. At this point, thank you. Thanks, Moran. I both disagree and agree with the comments about bodegas and walkability and whatnot. I think for me, the market study needs to be included when this comes back to us just to make sure everybody can look at it. Other than that, great project. Looking forward to seeing it. Appreciate the car for us and parking, all that good stuff. It's been a great project pretty much all the way through. It's nice that there's the addition of the more housing because we need it. So I think that's about it. Anybody have any more questions for staff applicant or otherwise, otherwise we will move to item 8.3. Go ahead, Sheila, go ahead. I just wanted to ask if city staff is aware of, well, this probably has to do with properties like the cannabis facility we just approved, but you wouldn't really walk to Target or Costco or any of those stores on Yolanda because there's no sidewalks. I'm guessing the cannabis facility will be required to do their frontage improvements, but no one else has any. But I think that's deciding to change the zoning is planning commission and council would approve that, is my understanding? That's a good question. We don't know. So we can't speak for planning commission or city council at this point. It's going through review with staff right now. There's still work to be done on this project to vet it to make sure that it would comply with all zoning code and general plan standards and so forth. Okay. In that case, I would like to register my support for having some commercial in there if it can still be retained. This is Sean here. I would add on that question regarding like the sidewalks as part of the phase two and the phase three project will be connecting the sidewalks that exist along Petaluma Hill Road, that front phase one, which we've recently constructed. So the walking path we would envision to that shopping center where the Trader Joe's and Target and Costco are would be North on Petaluma and then West on Kiwana Springs as opposed to Yolanda, which has a lot of industrial uses that haven't improved that frontage yet. Cool. Thanks for that. And then hearing no other comments or questions, we'll move on to item 8.3. I want to thank the applicant team and staff for presenting 8.2. And we look forward to seeing you guys back for the official review of the project. Have a great evening. May I just add one more note regarding yeah, board member Birch and Wix's comments predominantly. We definitely looked at the site for retail use and tried within our control to make it work. You'll see in the retail report that there were just grocery uses that arrived to this kind of sub market that weren't originally contemplated in the original comprehensive plan or the city plan. One of those, I think it was either Target or Trader Joe's, but only two of the three were originally anticipated. So there was more grocery use in this sub market than was originally assumed would exist. And then an interesting note is the seller we actually purchased this property from was Winco Foods, which is a grocer, I believe based in Idaho. And they had come to the conclusion that this site for whatever reason just didn't make sense for them. And so we subsequently bought it from them. But the retail study is included in the submittal for the rezone and general plan amendment. And we'll also provide it when we come back for preliminary design review. That'd be great, Sean. Thanks so much. And it looks like Sheila maybe has another quick question. Yeah, just real quickly. I don't know how much commercial is required when you're in the zoning district, but I don't think we're talking about anything like a Winco or a Trader Joe's either. And I think some of us who have mentioned they're thinking something much, much smaller. Right, the, what was planned for or what was reserved for on this site is a minimum 20,000 square foot grocer, which is not a small format grocer by any means. Those from my understanding are typically four to 5,000. So the zone or the designation actually requires a 20,000 square foot plus grocer at this location, which is part of the reason why we determined that this is more suitable for multi-family. Just the market just doesn't support that large of a grocer in this location based on our research and analysis. So are you saying also that the zoning does not allow for a scaled back version of retail or smaller shopping experience? Perhaps that's a question for staff. So just to jump in here, I think Bill's got a comment, we're gonna see this again. And I think we've given enough feedback at this point about the concerns that the board has about the reduction of the commercial component. And we've told the applicant, hey, a bodega'd be nice. Hey, this would be nice. I think we've given them enough information, really. And so that'd be my opinion. I'd love to move on. It's late and I'd like to get to the next item and we're gonna see this again. So Bill, did you have any additional comments? Essentially that, Chair Weigel, I was just going to remind the board, all of your comments will be captured for the record. They can be forward off to the planning commission, the city council as the general plan amendment and rezoning are heard. We'll make it clear and they know this as well. Although not, this is land use, not a purview of this board. It's still the comments are well stated and we'll be forwarded along. But yeah, I think I just wanted to remind the board, we can probably move on from this topic at this point. Cool, thanks. Michael, did you have any thoughts beyond this? It doesn't mean the same. I just making sure that the planning commission, here's our comments and we've been, we're being a squeaky wheel. So see what they think. Perfect, thanks Michael. I appreciate that. So thanks, Sean and Adam. And we'll move on to item 8.3, which I think means that we're bidding adieu to Vice Chair Hedgepeth. Have a great evening, Warren. So we'll wait for Warren to sign off here and then we can move on. There we go, all right. So item 8.3, concept design review for Brookwood Medical on 101 Brookwood Avenue and also 882, 884 and 1000 Second Street, file number DR 21-033. And with that, we'll turn it over to Project Planner Susie Murray. Hello, and I'm gonna bear with me while I share my screen here. Okay, can you see it in presentation mode there? We can, Susie, thanks so much. Great, so thank you for the introduction. Yes, this is Brookwood Medical, a medical office building being proposed along at the corner of Brookwood and Second Street. It's an integrated medical healthcare center that is allowed with the approval of a minor conditional use permit, which is something that would be approved by at the zoning administrator level and major design review, which will come back to the design review board. The project before you this evening or the request before you is concept design review to construct a three-story medical office building and a four-level parking garage the applicant and staff are looking for design direction and comments. Here's an aerial view of the site as it is today. That's San Rosa Creek to the south of it. That's, this is a challenging site because of the required creek setback because of the long narrow shape of the property and of course the two street frontages. Here is kind of a neighborhood context that you can see that you've got a lot of residential off to the west of the site. You've got commercial surrounding it to the east, to the north and pretty much to the south as well. There is a mix of some residential units south of it as well along Sonoma Avenue. The general plan land use designation and the zoning are the same neighborhood mixed use and this was a recent update as part of the downtown station area plan update that was adopted last year. Here is a site plan and don't spend too much time on the side because there's as much better in their presentation. So I'll just patch it through to the elevations that I selected for my presentation. The two on the top are basically the corner of Brookwood and second street. And then along Brookwood, the parking garage again, the applicant has some, I think some better illustrations. I've received two public comments, the one during our neighborhood meeting which I will defer to the applicant to clarify but there was a question as to which properties were actually involved in the project. And then there was somebody that was asking about the construction timeline and until we get through the process we can't or yeah, get through this process we can't really tell what the timeline is because no formal application has been submitted yet. So there was also a project or question about the quote not a project on the agenda. And I want to explain that that has to do with the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA. And because there is no change being proposed here it's just, we're just looking for comments. There's, it's defined as not a project. So that's really a definition for CEQA. It kind of runs right compatible with mitigated negative declaration or exempt project. So I think we may look for small alternatives but for the time being that's what that means. So pretty much again, because we're asking for a couple of or not a couple, a lot of comments hopefully but it's not a project because it'll be back for you. And then we will do the RCQA review. So with that, the applicant and the planning and economic development department are requesting that the design review board provide comments and direction for the Brookwood Medical Project. And for those of you who may be listening in and can't see the screen, my name is Susie Murray I'm the planner on the project. My phone number is 707-543-4348 and my email address is SMURRAY at srcity.org. And that concludes my presentation. The applicant has a presentation. I don't know if you want to go right into that or if you want to hear. Let's roll right into it, Susie. You got it. So we'll go to the applicant presentation right now. Yep. I'm trying, give me a second Drew or Chair Weigel. It's fine. So we're going to do, and just while you're doing that just we're going to kind of do the same thing we did in the last one. We're going to do the applicant presentation. We're going to take public comment and then we're going to go to questions and comments of the board. Try to accelerate this a little bit just cause I know it's getting late for everybody and we want to be respective of staff's time and also the applicant's time. Oops. Not the wrong one. Sorry about that you guys. All good Susie. I had them both queued up and then I accidentally closed theirs instead of mine. So here we go. Okay. I'm going to turn it over to the applicant team. If you guys could just let me know when you want me to flip the slides I'll move them forward for you. Hey Susie, there's nothing on the screen right now. Oh, there's no, I'm sorry. There is on mine. It's okay. It's okay. All right. There we go. We've got the, but it's not in presentation mode and now it is. Look at that. All right. We're ready to go. Awesome. So I think Tom's going to start us out here. Susie, we got him queued up. I'm going to ask Patty and Mike if you guys could... Yeah, I've given all the applicant team permission. Okay. Chair Weigel and remaining board members thank you so much for your time. My name is Tom LeBeau. I am the president CEO of a creative Realty Advisors and we are the project applicant. We prepared a very brief presentation. The first portion of which is to introduce a very small piece of which is to introduce my company, our background in healthcare. And then I'm going to hand very quickly the presentation over to the project team to go through the project as that we put together. Anyway, can we go to the next slide? So there's right now, we've got a number of different members of the project team but these are the major players. We've got myself at a creative Realty Advisors, Gensler Architects which I'm certain all of you are familiar with their work. They're a national architectural practice and then a local civil engineer, Carly Macy, Kurt Nichols and Breonna Morrison who have been integral in helping us navigate the Santa Rosa city and the requirements thereof. Next slide. I put together just a brief number of slides on some projects that we've done in California just to give you guys a sense for what we do as a company. The company was formed in 2002 and the exclusive focus of the company is to build medical office buildings primarily for health systems. Most of our buildings are, they range in size from 40 to 150,000 feet. We've constructed in the last 20 years over a million and a half square, million and a half square feet of medical office buildings. This project that you're looking at is actually in San Juan Capistrano and I just wanted to give you a picture of this illustration just to show the vernacular here is in what I would refer to as California traditional California San Juan. And we don't generally build medical office buildings in this format, but it was a requirement of the city that this vernacular be used almost consistently across the city and we were able to work with the city and get the type of medical intensity that we needed inside the building while also satisfying the city's vertical elevation requirements and site plan. Next slide. This project, I wanted to show you guys the board and to demonstrate this is a project with more modern vernacular. It was built on Beach Boulevard which is State Highway 39 in Huntington Beach. We acquired two existing medical office buildings and a parking structure. And we actually tore down the two medical office buildings and constructed what you see here. And we retained the parking structure and essentially to interpret it up to match up with the architecture. So why I selected this particular slide was just to show you that we're very familiar with infill development. This happens to be on State Highway 39 and we're familiar with the requirements of building in existing areas where there is a very high intensity of. Excuse me, existing development. Next slide. This last slide is a project, a larger project of ours that's built in Fullerton right next to St. Joseph's Providence State Joseph's Hospital. It is a large project, again, modern in design. In this particular project, we had a chemo-oncology center, cipher knife, multiple-dally radiology, and dialysis requiring an intense amount of power. Across the street, we integrated a smaller medical office building. This little building below is directly across the street from this more modern large structure and what you can't see here is a service retail building that we built, which included actually a little bodega and a Panera bread and actually a little kind of sushi bar for very close to the hospital, lots of foot traffic in this particular area. And so we kind of took almost a master plan. Again, this particular building on a very major road, passenger in Fullerton, required a lot of intensive street work and we did demolish an existing retail center to construct the three buildings. So I hope I didn't bore you with this many presentation here, I know it's been a long night, but I just wanted to give you guys a little bit of background on our company and so you could understand that we're very familiar with the intricacies and requirements of building in an infill nature and particularly focused on healthcare. We have assembled a project team, particularly Gensler and our local Carly Macy that we feel will give the city probably the best project opportunity for this particular site. Thank you for your time. So Susie, can you go to the next slide? Good evening, Chair Weigel and Design Review Board members, Kurt Nichols with Carly Macy. I'm just gonna give you a brief overview of the project, neighborhood context and site. Then I'm gonna hand off to Darren Atkisson of Gensler and then Brianna on our team will wrap up with the landscape and we promise to go quick because I know it's been a long night. So overview, it's about, we're looking at, actually one thing I wanna clarify having to do with the question that came from the public of which parcels are involved. We've actually scaled the project back slightly since what we submitted in that up in the northwest corner there's two smaller parcels that were shown in the materials in your packet with an entry drive off of Second Street with the parking along that drive. We've since decided to only use one of those parcels that Easter leave those two small parcels. So there's now three parcels that make up the project and the entry drive off of Second Street would be scaled back to be just a driveway but without any parking along it. And I'll show you that in the site plan in a minute. So now the, it's three parcels about four and a quarter acres. Next slide please. This shows views of the site and slide one is looking at the existing two-story office building on the corner. Slide two is looking along Brookwood Avenue toward the site, the largely vacant part of the site there. Photos three and five are looking from the creek back at the, back toward the site and let's see, photo six down in the lower right corner is showing the area of those two parcels. I was speaking of only the Easterly of which we're gonna include in the project currently. Next slide please. So again, looking at the neighborhood context here, Susie went over that a little bit but I call your attention to the fact that we're basically in an area of a lot of medical uses, medical offices and in close proximity to Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital and kind of that whole medical cluster there. And also as Susie pointed out, we're on the, well, I believe on the kind of the Easterly edge of what was included in the downtown station area specific plan. So the proposal is to develop a three-story medical office building of about 67,380 square feet with a four level parking garage. I would also point out the most significant amenity I would say natural on the side is of course Santa Rosa Creek which represents both an opportunity and a constraint. We see it as an opportunity for a creek side path with seating and picnic areas to incorporate the scenic creek area of the site amenity into the site. And but at the same time, it's also been a constraint. I think Susie touched on that, the fact that other than the corner of the site is vacant has to do with the challenges created that happens with the creek setback and the narrow shape of the property with brick wood on one side and the creek on the other. So both of those influence the site design. Next slide, please. So this site plan is a little different than the one in your packet, as I mentioned, if you look up to second street there, you can see the driveway now doesn't have parking on it and we're only including the Easterly of those two smaller parcels. So the building is proposed to be right up at the corner of second and brick wood. And the parking garage four levels would be along brick wood. Vehicular access, there would be three access points, the one I mentioned off of second street to the west side of the medical office building, another one off of brick wood between the medical office building and the parking garage and a third access off of brick wood at the southerly end of the parking garage. And then all these driveways are interconnected to provide for circulation on the site. This particular, the site plan here shows the ground level of the parking garage. And then there's three levels above that to make up the four levels. Parking, there are surface parking of 43 spaces other than what's at the lower level of the garage and the garage itself, including the lower level is 194 spaces, which combines for a total of 237 on the site. Another thing to call your attention to on the site plan is you can see kind of faintly the creek path that we're showing conceptually at this point that would also have areas with benches and perhaps picnic table amenities kind of along within the creek setback but in the area adjacent to the creek there. That also combines then with connections to a new sidewalk along brick wood. Currently there's no sidewalk along most of brick wood on this project frontage. This pathway would connect with that sidewalk and also connect with the sidewalk on second. So we'd have about a third of a mile kind of walking loop including that pathway. So that's kind of a brief summary of the site plan and overall at this point I'm going to hand off to Darren Akkesson to talk about the architecture. Thanks Kurt, just real quick while we're on the site plan I just want to highlight that Kurt pointed out the three vehicular entrances onto the site. The building is really designed around the idea of having a highly flexible footprint for to accommodate multiple medical planning delivery methods and the entrance on to the buildings there with those red arrows off of a drop off area just to kind of highlight those as kind of referencing the building as we look at it in elevation. So let's go to the next slide and look at the floor plan. You can see the cores just developed around those models. And so let's go to the next view. So material and pattern. I want to just briefly address that real quick. We did try to take the building and articulate the massing a bit with both articulating the stairs as objects, creating some canopies at entryways and creating a brow on multiple locations kind of address the entrance as an element as well as a larger scale element along Brookwood and second street at the corner. So as you approach the project from a distance you start to get a sense of an element that's identifies itself along that corner. And then as you get closer and entered the site the scale of that canopy comes down to more of a pedestrian scale to address the entrance. The materials here we're thinking are glazing some metal panel for the canopy brow. The darker color you see on the stairways is thinking we're thinking that could be like a rain screen wood panel product. And then the majority of the building is a warm toned integral color stucco. The element of the windows, the thinking there is to develop a pattern of windows that's less rigid, something that's more of a mosaic if you will to kind of help break up the monotony of the mass and create a little bit of interest with different size windows. And then that starts to relate to the parking structure. So if we go to the next few we'll see how, let's just go to the elevations things. So the proposed elevation, the Northeast elevation there on the bottom left corner is the elevation along Brookwood. So you can imagine this being adjacent to the building that we were just showing you had there's a similarity in the fenestration of those two. Now how this is developed is actually a metal screen product that can be attached directly to the surface of the parking structure that allows for vegetation to be grown up into it. And so along Brookwood, especially there will be greenery growing along the facade of the garage, okay. And there's a speed ramp along the garage but that's internal to the site. That's the top left elevation where you can see the ramp towards the inside. And we continued that screening on all sides so that there's a consistency there. So as you enter the site, you kind of understand that garage patterning up against the building from all views. I think from that, I'll hand it over to Breonna to talk a little bit about the landscaping. Great, next slide please. So as has been mentioned, the primary landscape feature of the project site is a really lovely section of Santa Rosa Creek that runs along the Southern property line. And the project landscaping aims to really extend that amenity into the site and enhance it with native plantings in that Creek setback that we discussed and that will transition into the Creek's natural riparian vegetation. Plantings throughout the rest of the site aim to complement and highlight the building and parking garage architecture while tying the structures to the site. Street trees along second Brookwood will help provide pedestrian scale to the structures and the proposed species of trees will relate to those that are already in the surrounding area. As Darren mentioned, the parking garage will include green screens with fines to help enliven the structure and provide visual interest as well as connect visually to the Creek tree line in the background. And of course, the proposed landscape will be primarily native and adapted low water use specimens and will be watered with whether adaptive water conserving irrigation systems. And that's the end of the presentation. Back to you, Susie. Well, I think I'm gonna pass it back to the board unless you have questions for applicant team or staff. So yeah, so what I think we're gonna do is we're gonna go to public comment and then I'm gonna wrap it back to the board to do questions, comments, boom, boom, boom, all at once. So it looks like we have a hand raised already so I'm gonna turn it to Patty to do public comment. And a reminder, you get three minutes to speak on this project only. So Patty. Okay, we get, we have one raised hand, Tim McCarthy-Smith and can speak when you're ready. Hello, thank you for taking my comment. I know this sounds insane but I've actually been watching this since 4.30 this afternoon. So I've been with you for the last four hours. Somehow I'm sucked into this. My comment, Mike, I have a question and a comment. I drive- Mr. McCarthy-Smith, could you state your name and kind of your relation to the project if you live nearby, you know, that kind of thing as well, thanks. Thank you. My name is Timothy McCarthy-Smith. I live at 38 North Apartments. And so I've listened to the whole thing about the cannabis facility and the phase three there. I drive past this lot every day on my way to work. And from a traffic flow standpoint, on Brookwood Avenue, there is a solid median. I saw that there were several left, or there were two left turns out of the proposed parking area. And my question is, which doesn't have to be answered immediately, is what is the impact on traffic on Brookwood Avenue turning left coming out of the parking area between the narrow corner that was discussed around that new structure? I have a general comment about buildings. My comment is a loose comparison to the Mission A's hardware on Highway 12 between Betty's Fish and Chips and Mission Boulevard. It is now surrounded on each side by multi-story storage facilities made out of concrete blocks. Being subjective, quite frankly, it is ugly and very disappointing that such incredible real estate on the Santa Rosa Creek has been allowed to be built into such an imposing eyesore. As a resident of 38 North Apartments, I would like to not see a similar situation in this center of the city. Thank you very much for taking my comments. Thanks so much, Mr. McCarthy Smith. We appreciate that. So seeing no other comments from the public at this time, I'm going to ask Patty, did we receive any voicemails or emails for this project? I have not received any voicemails and I have not seen any emails. Awesome. So seeing no other hands, I'm going to close public comment and bring it back to the board for questions and comments of staff and the applicant and then I'm sorry, questions of staff and the applicant and also comments on the project. But first, I'd like to get Mr. McCarthy Smith's question about the left-hand turn lanes answered by the applicant. So probably Kurt, I would think, maybe. Kurt, you're muted. I can hear him talking from his office. Let me try again. We've been looking at those accesses off of Brookwood as being primarily right in, right out. Certainly the one that's closest to second is too close for any kind of a median break. There's an existing median break closer to the other one but I'm not sure that that will actually make sense to have a left turn there. It's not something that we're proposing. We had a pre-application meeting with staff and there will be further studies of traffic and parking as the project progresses. But at this point, we're looking at right in, right out. Thanks, Kurt. Appreciate you. Yeah, I drive this stretch of road pretty frequently and it tends to sometimes be a bit of a super highway as it were as it runs between Sonoma Ave and Second Avenue or Second Street there. So we'll go back to the board. Questions of staff and applicant again and comments if you have any. So Sheila, you're up first. Thank you. My comments, I guess after seeing this, I really, you know, I'm not a huge fan of having parking garages where they're still visible but I understand that this site has constraints and they're trying to work around that. I think the green screen is a great way to soften the appearance of the parking garage. So I definitely support that. I like the landscaping and adding the trail by the creek. I think that's really taking advantage of your site. And I know a lot of times people go in tandem to medical appointments. So one person's sitting in the car while the other person's inside. So I think that's a really nice amenity. And then with regard to the actual building, I guess I'll have to say I felt a little underwhelmed. It presents is very flat. I thought some of the examples that were provided of the other buildings were more interesting. So I know this is just conceptual but that's my comments. Thanks Sheila. And then we'll go to board member Wicks. Thank you. Kind of agree with board member Waliski's comment. I'm not a big fan of seeing a parking garage be so prevalent especially on a corner and a turn like brookwood. But I think if you're gonna have a parking garage, I think this is fairly nicely done and the green screens kind of help soften what I think could have been a brutal solution to the site. Again, understanding this is conceptual review and conceptual elevations. I like the mosaic of the window patterns on the solid faces. I'd love to see how you develop the storefront, especially the corner of brookwood and first street, second street, sorry, second street. I think there's an opportunity to really do some playfulness with the glass. It could be a real jewel element to that corner if you mix some different colors of glass in the storefront system in a sort of random pattern like you've selected for the windows for the rest of the office building. Pretty good project overall. I'd love to, can't wait to see it more developed and brought to us for preliminary design review. Thanks, Henry, board member McHugh. Thank you, Drew. You're going out of order, why not? Why not? I too like the landscaping. I'd be curious to know a little bit more about trees and shrubs and that sort of thing, but I think I'd just like to know a little bit more about that. I am feeling not real warm and easy about the building itself as a rectangle. It's kind of boxy to me. I'd like something a little more interesting with a little bit of some of the creativity that you used, that you shared with us in your staff presentation at San Juan and some of those other, the examples you used. This is just kind of dull in my estimation. And so I'd like to see something a little bit more interesting. Thank you. Thanks, board member Birch. I'm actually going into how I'm seeing people on my screen just to mix it up. Sure, I think this is a great start to a good project. There's obviously a lot more to come. As far as the medical office building goes, I do think that I agree with, I certainly agree with Henry about wanting to see that playfulness in the two-story glass door front on the corner. I think that is going to be the dominant visual element as you approach certainly coming south, the view from coming from downtown. Having that two-story sort of like open proscenium corner is a really cool opportunity to do something that is really unique. I think that the elevations are a little challenging. Elevation architecture is always tough to look at. When you consider just how much of your view and attention that two-story glass door front and the surround is going to grab, I think that as the Gensler team knows, some great renderings when they come back of something that's really creative with the store front and the glass would be really big. I think it would be a really landmark opportunity and a great way to use the whole site with this odd quadrangle and then use that corner to be a really striking element. So I think that the vanilla parts of the building that sort of fade away are mostly treated with the, as you said, the mosaic window pattern, but I don't think they're going to be what's seen. I do like the green screen on Brookwood on the parking. I think rather than potentially matching sort of the corner volumes of the building at the south end of the garage, there may be an opportunity to break the garage up a bit from that corner to maybe a midpoint to maybe an entry point that's adjacent to the building that then picks up the rhythm of the start of that arch and the windows. It doesn't have to be glass. It doesn't have to be necessarily the same rain screen material. Maybe it's the potential for artwork and artwork solves everything, right? But a more artistic approach to maybe a corner, middle and start the glass. It's an interesting street. Everybody drives too fast, but it is kind of a low-speed street. So, and I don't know what kind of future development is going to bring there, but it seems like there's an opportunity to maybe break that up just a bit without spending too much money and making it something that's creative. I do like the way that the corner artwork came out at the Memorial Hospital Garage. Real simple solution to a giant corner and there is an opportunity to set up a rhythm on Brookwood as you drive by. So, I think the project has a lot of potential. I can't wait to see the formal presentation for the action item down the road. And I think the start on how you're using the corner maxed out the space and having an opportunity for a real two-story element is very cool. So. Thanks, Michael. And we're going to go to Board Member Sharon. Great. Thank you. Thanks for bringing this project and using a site, utilizing a site that has been vacant for a long time and has been kind of calling out for something to be there. And, yeah, medical uses are very, very worthy for that. So thank you for that. Right off the bat, the use of the multi-purpose trail or the trail with the gathering areas along the creek frontage is great. It'll be nice for people working at the office building for people waiting for their loved ones for appointments. And who knows, maybe the police from around the corner will come and use that as a nice little amenity there. Again, bringing more people to the creek is a really great thing. And I think that's one of my main comments on the project is to really see, to try and view the constraints really as opportunities. I think the use of that creek frontage is a great use of an opportunity there. So, yeah, going last, or almost last, that a lot of things have already been said. I do think that Board Member Burch and I are vibing on the same artistic theme. I think that when you're driving south on Brookwood there, you're going to be confronted with a large building on the corner and then an even larger parking garage. Not a huge fan of seeing the huge parking garage there as you're coming down there. I think your efforts to perforate that frontage there are really great. I do, of course, think that Curt and Bran are going to do a great job with the plantings and with trees and helping out with the vines or any softening of materials that you're going to have there. But I do think that you can see the frontage there of along the road as an opportunity. And I think, yeah, Michael brought up the parking garage over Memorial. You've got almost a large canvas there. You've got areas where you can actually hide, which is what you're trying to do by perforating the parking garage. You're hiding and trying to recede into the creek zone there. It's still going to be a parking garage. And so it's going to be this massive structure. And so you can try and hide a little bit and screen in. But I think you should also recognize that it's a parking garage and recognize that it's an edifice that's there. Use that as a canvas. Use it for something. Use it as an opportunity for something. I don't know if that's color. It could be we've got great muralists in this town and in this area. You could have beautiful murals. You could have a public artwork there. Something that is got all of these people driving past that and you have something there. It's a great way to provide. You're providing the public service of the medical offices, but then providing a public amenity to a car-centric part of town there. You've got some pedestrian areas there, the landscape treatment, and then also add some visual interest. Really add to the corner rather than try and hide and be so private. Make it a public amenity. That playfulness that was talked about with the storefront too. I mean, you come around that corner. You're sitting at those lights and you come around a corner and you will see that entire frontage. And so have some fun with it. Think about nighttime, too. Beautiful lighting as well. Really take what you've got and bring some real playfulness and fun and color and light to it. But it's going to be very... I'm glad to see this area, this lot being utilized and utilized well. So thank you for doing that. And it's going to be fun to see what you guys come up with. Thanks a lot. So I guess it's my turn. So I, like John, am wildly underwhelmed by the building. But I want to mention something I think that maybe the other board members may not be aware of. But because this is in the downtown station area plan, I believe it's subject to the new FIR regulations. And so as such, I have an idea. I don't think this building is big enough. So what I mean by that is I think that the applicant should increase the size of this building by a story, take the garage, double its height, and then put housing on the southeast corner of the property. That's what I think should happen at this site. I think it can handle it. I think it can do something funky and creative between the using the parking garage to feed the housing and also serve the medical office building. It could be a senior housing development. It's right there next to medical. But I really feel like the building's underwhelming and the site is underutilized. And I don't think you're going to hit the FAR. So just an idea, but I'd like to see where you guys go and see maybe if you can do something creative and interesting and really kind of maybe overdevelop the site in a way that'll serve our community, both with maybe some housing or some, you know, in that area. And then the housing could then cavize on the Santa Rosa Creek Trail that you're creating and kind of prevent some of the problems that are there right now in terms of homeless people accessing it, RVs, parking, you know, all that sort of stuff. I find it strange that you can't access the medical building from either Brookwood or Second Street. There are people that walk to medical appointments of low income, low income nature. There are people that bicycle and they have to kind of navigate around in a parking garage and parking a lot and whatnot to access this building. I wonder about that. It seems like there should be access from that corner. And then I guess my other final comment would be, you know, I would assume that this is for Providence Hospital which would mean that it's tied in with Santa Rosa Memorial. There's a medical office building that just got built there that has a lot of creative massing and colors and materials that this board approved not too long ago. I actually think Michael, myself and Adam were all on the board at that time when that happened along with the garage. So the garage to me feels very familiar in terms of that garage. When I looked at it, I went, oh, I've seen this garage before. And then the medical office building, I think if it's, I don't know. So in that vein, on Gensler's website, I was tinkering around. There's a Physicians Medical Park in Torrance that I think is really unique and interesting and kind of has some of the flavor of what you've done. And maybe you guys could look at that again and play with it and see what happens. But that, those are my thoughts and comments. Does anybody have any additional thoughts and comments as they were, as other folks were speaking before we close out or go to the applicant for questions? I've got one quick thing to say. First off, I admire your adventurous spirit. I really do. I think that those are the kinds of things that need to be said in public forum, not a public hearing, but public forum. I don't know if they're doable. I'm sure that there's a lot of, the FIR is interesting to try to work out, but I do think that it's admirable when I appreciate you as the chair having an adventurous spirit about how to promote creative solutions to land use. And again, we're the design review board. We tend to dip over into land use, but I appreciate hearing it in this forum. So I think I will reiterate what a couple of people said. I think this is the sort of germ of a good idea for this corner. I understand its connection to the memorial side, and I don't want it to become sort of a simple Sonoma Avenue 1970 solution to medical. We really, it really should extend some of the good things that have started to happen around the hospital rather than just sort of be an extra. And I think the other projects that the applicant has shown us are a good example. Please no fake stone, no wine country architecture. We would appreciate something urban and contemporary and meaningful. We don't need you to throw a stone on columns and sort of do a foe wine country thing. But it is a great start to a good project. And I think that we'll look forward to seeing it when it comes back as an actual application that we're gonna act on. So. Cool. Anybody else? Yeah. Just like to reiterate that there are gonna be an immense amount of eyes on this property is viewed a lot. And so really think about that. And I think Drew's a creative input with rethinking the idea. That could be an amazing thing to think about right there. But also his idea with having access to that side right now it's a closed site with everything on the roadway there and with the parking garage. It's closed. And so think about ways to open it up, make it more friendly. Going into medical buildings can be intimidating. Create something that's not intimidating, it's welcoming. Even if you're just driving by or you're taking your kid to school and you have a beautiful building there. Create a real centerpiece. Really make this a focal point to an important part of the town. Well, anybody else? Final thoughts? Okay, not hearing any. We'll go to any questions from the applicant on any of the comments you've heard tonight or questions that I guess we didn't have any questions but any questions on the comments you heard from the applicant team? This is Darren. No questions, just wanted to thank you for your comments. I think it's good feedback and great stuff for us to kind of go back and start to kind of rethink. So I appreciate all of your comments. Yeah, did all that for me. Thanks all, appreciate it. Thanks Kurt. And it looks like we got Tom. I think Tom you can unmute yourself if you still have control there. Okay, can you hear me now? We can, thanks. Oh, listen, I know it's late but I wanted to appreciate you very much appreciate your time and I appreciate your willingness to look at the language of the site. It is a very, very difficult site. Setback is immense from the creek. There are alluvial and colluvial soil conditions because of the creek overflows which prevent loading of any significance. We can't put case-ons down. So the site, there's a reason why it's the way it is. And I didn't want to kind of just highlight a couple of things with regard to medical and I mentioned it is my career to build medical buildings and each building is different but medical isn't retail. It is, it's hospitality and it has a medical vein. So I just wanted you guys to kind of take a look at the way I kind of view things when you look at this project. And that is that for a medical project to be successful it has to be very clean and clear. People don't feel well when they go to medical buildings generally. There are separate entries for physicians and for doctors. They enter and exit away from where patients are which creates ingress, egress issues around the structure. The two roads, Second and Brookwood are from a medical perspective, very busy streets. We don't want people coming in to the building from those streets because it's, frankly, they don't feel well. The signage, it doesn't work very well for healthcare. So that's why we direct everybody to a covered patient canopy where people kind of come in and they have A or B exit entry and then there's a doctor entry off of second. But I think it's a good comment because for patients at the human level the building has to feel warm. It has to feel, it can't feel scientific and cool. That's the 70s building. The reason the building is shaped the way it is is because the way healthcare is delivered now which is in a 20 to 25,000 square foot floor plate on a multi-specialty clinic. There are no more corridors or doctor doors, generally speaking. So what we designed is a responsibly affordable care act and it does have the kind of materials and signage and directionals that we need in our buildings to deliver patients safely and efficiently to their medical practice. So I just, when you're looking at this and I very much love architecture but I hope that you will look at it in the view of what it actually is. It's medical hospitality and a lot of these elements that you're talking about are more urban retail. So we're definitely gonna take all of your comments to heart and we very, very much appreciate your expertise and your focus and your representation of the community in an effort to make this particular project the best project we could possibly make it. I just hope that when you look at it, you'll look at it given the constraints of the site and the use and the people who are actually using it. So again, thanks so much for your time and I appreciate the comments. Thanks, Tom, and we appreciate you bringing a project and you've assembled a great team. Also, I failed to mention that. I know Kurt and Brianna professionally over there, Carl, I may see they're awesome and we all know the reputation Gensler has. So I have a lot of confidence that they'll take our comments, they'll go back, they'll tweak it up and it's gonna be a great project moving forward. So thank you for bringing that before us. With that, I think we are done with item 8.3 unless anybody has anything else. But I know Bill has something that he would like to share with everybody before we adjourn for the evening. Thank you, Drew. Yes, I do. I have some bittersweet news to share with you all tonight. Mostly sweet, actually. I wanted to announce that our esteemed board secretary, Patty Pacheco-Greg is going to be retiring. And so tonight is her last meeting with us. And for those that have been on the board, I see Michael's reaction. He will agree with me. Patty is absolutely the brains behind this organization. She's been with us for quite some time with the city. She had helped me on so many occasions and many others here at the city in her long tenure. And so Patty and her wonderful husband, Larry, they're both, he's a retired public servant. They deserve a great retirement anyone. And so I can't thank you enough, Patty. And maybe you can turn your camera on for a minute. And really just I'm so happy for you and Larry and wish you all the best in your retirement. So thank you very much. Thank you, Bill. That's very nice of you. I've enjoyed working with you guys. You guys are great. So it's been, I love hearing the projects you talk about in your comments. And when I drive around town with my husband, I say, you see all those trees there? That's design review board, those trees. You see that overhang, but that's design review board. So it's been a pleasure. So much, Patty. Yeah, it's been, I mean, Patty was, I think the first person I met when I was appointed to design review board and she just made everything so easy. And so we are, I told Bill when he let me know, I said, oh, what? No, you're kidding me. No, this can't be happening. So I was torn up and it's unfortunate we can't be with you there in person today to bid you farewell into your next great adventure here. So I think it's appropriate, given our virtual setting that we'll just go around the virtual room and let everybody say a few words if that's okay with you. Just, Michael looks chomping at the bit, so we'll go with him. No, I just really, I did a stretch before on design review and a stretch as chair and Patty just was always the support system like you drew, I walked in to be sworn in after I was found myself sort of slipping through the trap and joining the board. And Patty was right there and it was just such a, it was so interesting to meet these dedicated public employees, public servants who were so committed to the city, the dignity and integrity that Patty has always displayed and just the absolute direct earnestness to carry the public's business forward is inspiring and I've appreciated you Patty to no end. And I hope you have lots of good klezmer shows in your future and lots of music to play and good luck in your retirement and just we will miss you for sure. Thank you so much. We'll go to Henry now. What's the Henry's favorite again? What Mr. Birch and Mr. Weigel said before me but I'm going to really miss those friendly text message nudges too for me to log on, turn my camera off and check my mind. So appreciate all your help and when I was, when I was a newbie, I, you helped me flail along in the beginning and I really appreciate that. So enjoy your retirement and hope to see you around on a casual setting outside the city business. Let's go to Adam. Yeah, Patty, well, well deserved retirement and well deserve some time because you definitely have brought the energy and yeah, as Bill mentioned, you know helping this, helping this thing to run. So thank you so much. And it's, you've always done it very with such friendliness and welcoming, you know, it's been really great. Yeah, you've made this a very pleasant, fun experience. And, you know, of course the work is fun and pleasant too. Don't get me wrong Bill, so it's all, I'm fun on the board, but Patty, you know even having the baskets of little candies or snacks or anything like that in the chambers has been very helpful. So you're going to be missed. And I really do hope that when we are able to have a gathering in person, some point in the future that you do come by so can give you a hug and thank you. And just thank you so much. Thank you. So Adam, and then we'll go to our two newest board members here, board member, McHugh John. Patty, I just want to thank you so much for the help you've given me both when I was on the Cultural Heritage Board and now on the Design Review Board that answered my questions and helped me understand my role and my purpose. And so thank you so much. I mean, I really do appreciate the help you've given me. And I am grateful for the fact that you and your husband are retiring and you're going to start a new life. And I am happy for you for that. But I'm also sad because I've got a mission. And thank you again so much for your help. Thank you. And then we'll go to our brand new board member here, Sheila. Yeah, why'd you end with me? Patty, you and I have only met once because we're doing everything virtually, but you were fantastic and got me going. Lickety-split with attending a meeting in the next couple of days, I think it was. And as a public servant, I know it can be hard sometimes. But it is rewarding and I want to thank you for your public service and wish you all the best in retirement. Thank you. There was a method to my madness because you're also a public servant, see? Can I say one last thing, Drew? Sure, go ahead, Adam. Patty, now that you'll have some extra time, keep an eye on board vacancies, put in an application for, maybe a colleague on here, you know the drill. So I've considered, I've been thinking about CAB a little bit. Yep. Perfect, that would be awesome. You would be an expert at following the agenda and chiming in on projects in her neighborhood as well. So Bill, what's the ETA for us having a gathering? When it's protocol gonna allow us to meet and welcome our new board members and maybe say goodbye to Patty properly. Yeah, as we've done in the past, as I've mentioned, outgoing board members, we will also include Patty in that as well. New board members, we always like to have a social gathering to send off the the party members, welcome our new members. At this point, everything will be predicated on guidance from the city. And we're still working through that in terms of getting back to normal. We're doing the hybrid meetings with the city council where there's some members in the chambers, some still virtually. So I think once we get that settled out, hopefully soon we'll be able to schedule something and do that social gathering. It's a long overdue. Yeah, thanks. Thanks again, Patty. Again, you've been awesome. And Bill's right. You make up all this go for sure. So you will be missed and unfortunately probably your replacement won't be able to fill your shoes, right? So thank you. Thank you. I have a feeling you're gonna get a really good replacement. Thank you so much. We're hoping. So with that, with that, I think Bill, I did, Andrew talked just while we're on that topic, just real quick. We did talk about either hybrid or returning to council chambers. I know I talked to Mayor Rogers a couple of weeks ago. He was asking me when our board was gonna return to council chambers. Do we have any, are we still just waiting for direction from the city on that pretty much or? Yeah, I think a lot of moving pieces right now. So I think we do have some guidance based on what the council is doing. So with Patty's departure, we'll be bringing on a new staff person to help us out. So I think we'll coordinate with that person. And as soon as we can do something, perhaps if it is even a hybrid meeting format, we'll do that. Just not quite ready for it. Well, that's what I thought. Like I said, Mayor Rogers did ask me. He goes, hey, when are you guys going back in person? I went, I don't know what you're supposed to tell me. So anyway, so without further ado, we'll adjourn for the evening. Thank you everybody so much for this marathon meeting. I appreciate it. We had a lot to cover and we got a lot done and we got those last two projects done real quick. So I appreciate that. And everybody have a good weekend. Thank you. Very dinner. We are adjourned. Thanks. Good night.