 Good morning, Moni. Good morning, Kimberly. Can you hear my voice? Yeah, sounds great. Thank you. Good morning, Andy. Let me take a look. Hey, good morning. God, I hope my connection works. Hey, I noticed the URL for the zoom meeting on the agenda is different. The updated ends in 1773 versus the 61, whatever it is, 8761. I hope the website link is correct at least. That's probably what people would use. I always do it at the same time though, so it's making me nervous. I don't think I can check that right now. I have too many questions. Okay. Yeah, 8761. That's the current one. So that's good. Okay. Yeah, we need to update the agenda. And that's a fixed URL right for all meetings. No. It changes all the time. No, it changes with every meeting. We can't get a constant URL for these meetings. Nope. It's because of the YouTube streaming. Yeah, we should be alert to that then. Yeah, that's a bummer. I've got my background, my rooms and mass. Okay, so 8761 is the correct webinar ID. And that's what it says on the agenda. It does. Yeah. How did you get here with the link in 1773? Well, I didn't have any URL with the appointment for today. Oh, okay. And so I went to the agenda. Okay. That I copied for my action minutes today. Got it. So I realized what happened because when I create the, the, the, the, the invitation for the meeting, I created for a long distance in advance, but then I update the information with the current zoom meeting. And I didn't send you a new one. I updated the corrections, but in future, I'll just choose the option where I give you a new update each time as well. And then you'll have the updated zoom information in your outlook. I realized here. I grabbed the URL from the February 18th meeting. So we're good. Okay. My action minutes that I copied. I take the, the agenda for the current meeting. And I just. Turned into action minutes. That has a correct URL. So we're good. Sorry. No, that's okay. It just was like double check and everything, which is fine. Yeah. You know, we, Kimberly, we, we had that. Question regarding outdoor lighting interpretation. And I'm just kind of segwaying a little bit here. One question was, you know, who's, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, who's in charge of, you know, who's in charge of, you know, the first question was, you know, who's, who are, can interpretations be appealed? Yes. But if an action is, is taken without notice, how would anybody know. That the matter might be appealable. So. In looking at the zoning administrator. It just occurred to me, maybe when we have an interpretation that's been finalized internally, you know, we're ready to publish it, that we use the zoning administrator meeting and agendize it on the meeting, it gets 72 hours posting at least, it's available to the public. We describe briefly like we do the other items on the agenda and interpretation and that starts the 10-day appeal period. Okay, it's funny that it's probably going to become more and more common of a question, you know? Well, it just, you know, it occurs to me that these determinations really ought to be out there for a public review and if there's an interested party, as we do with these exterior lights, they would have opportunity to review and, yeah, you know, and these meetings are, I think, a very natural vehicle to do that. I've done this in past at other jurisdictions where we tie them into a already scheduled public meeting, such as our zoning administrator, but that would be a different practice. I'll talk to Amy and Andrew about that. Yeah, so we have a few participants in our list here. Is there any member of the applicant team or any applicant team that would like to do a sound check? You can raise your hand within Zoom and we can test your sound if you like. Okay, we've got Nate Bisbee. You should receive a prompt and as soon as you answer that prompt, we'll give that a try. Hi, Kimberly. Nate here. Good morning. Good morning. So if you can unmute yourself for the rest of the meeting, then we won't have to do that every time. Okay. Hi, Christine Talbot. Hi there. This is Christine. Hi, Christine. Good morning. We have Gary Johansson. You want to give your sound a try? I'll test my sound now. How's this working out? Sounds great. Thanks. Okay. Thank you very much. I have a, will there be, I don't have any visual right now other than the zoning administrator meeting agenda. Is that correct? That's correct. This is a webinar meeting. And so as an attendee, you will be a participant by direction of the zoning administrator. So at the appropriate point, if you wish to raise your hand, you'll be recognized and you'll, and you can speak. Are you a member of an applicant team or an attendee from the public or? Yes. I'm the medical director of the hospice and been one of the visionaries and planters of this through the years. Okay. So when we get to that agenda item, the zoning administrator will give direction on your participation. Other than that, if you want to control your own meeting settings, meaning mute yourself when you're not talking, that's appreciated. Okay. And then use the raise hand function in zoom when to be recognized by the zoning administrator. Okay. Thank you very much. So Mr. Johansson, you can go ahead and mute yourself when you're not talking. Okay. Hey, if you're supposed to be a panelist for this meeting, can you please raise your hand and we have a Andrea learn. We can test your sound. Andrea, you should have a prompt. And if you answer the prompt, there you go. I want to test your sound. Can you hear me? You can Andrea. Are you a member of an applicant team? Yes, I am. I'm the chief philanthropy officer for center is a memorial hospital. And I don't have a formal presentation, but want the opportunity to fill in and answer questions if needed. Perfect. Thanks. You can follow the direction of the zoning administrator. And from this point forward, if you can mute yourself when you're not speaking, then we won't have to go through the prompts. Perfect. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. recording secretary. Let's start the meeting. Switch to video. Thank you. So I'm calling to order the March 4th. Meeting of the zoning administrator. I'm the zoning administrator. My name is Andy Gustafson. I'm senior planner with the city of Santa Rosa. And I'll conduct the meeting today. And I've been able to come to the launch of the meeting. So I'm going to open that up. I want to do this in my own remote in order to comply with the provisions of the governor's executive orders. Concerning. Brown act meeting requirements. When we do have a COVID. Health order. That strives to minimize public gatherings to control the transmission of COVID-19. So thank you for joining us. For this. Calling in, I don't see any from the attendee list that are calling in by phone that all of the rest of you are all on the Zoom call. This meeting will be conducted like our normal public meetings. We have an agenda, each item will be considered in turn. Each item will have a project planner presentation. The applicant will be given an opportunity to add to the presentation and then after that interested parties, members of the public may also comment. In each of these three steps, I'll acknowledge each of you. Those of you who are on the Zoom call, please raise your hand and you'll be recognized by the recording secretary. And today, any action taken on a matter can be appealed. The appeal period is 10 days or the next following business days. So if I were to look at my calendar, it looks like that would be Monday the 15th at the end of the day. So it should any matter be decided today and you wish to appeal and approval the or denial. You can do so by contacting the project planner and submitting the appeal form by the end of the day, March 15th. All right, so the first item on the agenda is an opportunity for public comment. This agenda item is an opportunity for people to speak on matters that are not on the agenda today and that are within the purview of the zoning administrator. If you do wish to make a public comment, please raise your hand and you'll be recognized. Seeing none, I will move on to our scheduled items on the agenda. The first item, 3.1 is a minor conditional use permit at 975 Kinwood Street to allow for a 9.5 foot fence in the backyard and the project planner is Ms. Loneci Cully. Thank you and good morning, Mr. Gustafson. I'm going to share my page, my screen, so here is my presentation. Can you see it? Yes. Great, thank you. So as you mentioned, this is a minor conditional use permit for a fence. The red line here shows the location of the proposed fence which is already built between two neighbors. It is going to be nine and a half foot tall fence rear yard for a single family residential use. The property is zoned R12 and the general plan land use is medium density residential. This is a fence that has been already constructed and it was recently constructed and there was a code enforcement but it was not for the fence. The code enforcement was regarding the tree. As you can see, there's a tree between two fence and the applicant is trying to protect the tree so the tree will not be removed and will be stay at the same location and the fence will be on two sides of the tree. However, the fence higher than seven foot will require a building permit. So the applicant is legalizing by this fence, by conditional use permit and getting a building permit. The fence was built previously in the same location at the same height. The picture on the left shows the old fence and the picture on the right shows the new fence. We send the notice to neighbors between 600 feet. I did not receive any call or concern regarding the proposed fence and the project has been reviewed in compliance with California Environmental Quality Act and it qualifies for class tree exemption which is a construction of an accessory structure and the planning and economic development department recommends that the zoning administrator by resolution approve and minor conditional use permit for the property located at 975 Kingwood Street. I have to add one more thing. I was able to find the show here. I was able to find the subdivision plans or final map for this project, for this site and I was able to find the proposed location of the fence for that subdivision that shows there are retaining walls on that side of the property. So the reason that fence is that high because it's a different elevation or grades between two properties. So on one side, the neighbor on the north side has a higher grade than the lower part. That's why the fence on this property is nine and a half because there's like almost two feet retaining wall and the applicant had to construct the fence on that retaining wall. So I just want to make sure the reason that we are having that high fence is due to the existing retaining wall that was there at the time the subdivision was created. And that was my presentation for today. Thank you. You are muted. Thank you. And thank you for the presentation and that additional information about the prior subdivision improvement plan and at the boundary fence that is requested for increased height here is built on a low retaining wall. I think those are important facts in this circumstance. Now is the opportunity for the applicant or the property owner to comment if they wish to do so. So please raise your hand, you'll be recognized. I see none, I'll give a moment more if you wish to comment either the applicant or the applicant's agent, please raise your hand. Okay, I don't see any. Is there any member of the public attending this meeting who wishes to comment on this item? Again, I see no raised hands. Another moment, all right. So I will close the public meeting regarding this matter and just briefly, I want to take a look at the resolution. I think the resolution, I would ask, I think the findings are fine, but I think the evidence that was presented regarding the prior subdivision improvement plan should be noted in one of the findings which would not be a material modification to the approval or the resolution, but just help clarify for the record that this was an overhyped fence that was previously approved with that subdivision. And Ms. C. Collie, I'll ask that you make those modifications. Now I would suggest just looking at this, that finding number three is probably the best place where you can memorialize that this fence was, is essentially a replacement fence from the prior approved one. And we can finalize the language there, but otherwise the conditions of approval are good and we can move forward and I'll approve this matter with that findings modification. So I will add that language. I will add that language about the final improvements on the third findings. Excellent, thank you. So that concludes matter 3.1. We move on to 3.2 and this is for conditional use permit and design review for 520 Boil Drive. It's the proposed development of the Santa Rosa Memorial Hospice House. And Adam Ross is the project planner. Adam, are you ready to give your presentation? Yes, I am, Mr. Zoni administrator. And I just to clarify, it's a minor conditional use permit and a minor designer view. So I'm gonna go ahead and start sharing my screen with the presentation here. And let me know if you see this. If I do, if you could put, there you go. You put it in the presentation mode, perfect, thank you. So my name is Adam Ross. I'm the project planner for this site, or this project before you, which is the Santa Rosa Memorial Hospice House. It's a minor designer view and a minor conditional use permit, file number PRJ 20-011, the individual file numbers are CUP 20-024 and DR 20-031. The project location is at 520 Doyle Drive. It includes four parcels. As part of this project, they would all be merged. It's just south of the existing Morrill Hospital main campus and additional buildings. And then to the north is more of the offices and medical offices and the parking structure you could see here. And then on the other side, it is surrounded by residential for the most part, single family, detached residential. So it's four commercial lots. They're currently vacant. The project includes 12 private home-like room facilities. The total building proposed is approximately 847 square feet. It includes some outdoor spaces for residents there. The business plan includes up to six staff members or less. That's from the applicant, I'll let them kind of get into that. But that's the peak staff at any given time, but it's more likely to be less. But again, I'll let them go over it. So with this operation, it's 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, which is inherent in this type of use. Here's an aerial, I just wanted to point out just a couple of things on here. You have this, you've got setbacks. It's the site complies with all required setbacks. Right here is a generator location, which was originally shown, but a little bit later, I'll get into it. But this area just for clarification is not where the generator is going to go. It's gonna go over here and I'll get into that a little bit. But just on the forefront for anyone in attendance who's not part of the applicant team. Just some more project description, essentially just a repeat of what I said. And I'm just looking here if there's anything else. Not really anything else as far as that description goes, but here's some 3D renderings of what the front would look like facing Doyle Park Drive. Here's kind of like a South view of the private rooms. They provided that human scale look of height. It's one story, it's not two, three or four stories. They use metal finishes, fiber cement finishes, wood finishes, stone finish, and some glazing where appropriate, especially facing Doyle Park Drive. Obviously, there's other glazing in and throughout the property, but for more private kind of setting for obvious reasons. So the materials used are appropriate for the use essentially, and it's in likeness to existing, it's kind of like a transition between the residences and the existing commercial spaces. The general plan in zoning is R1, 6, and it's low density residential. The use proposed is allowed via approval of a minor conditional use permit. So here's some elevations. This top one is facing Doyle Park Drive. This other one is facing, is the other end of the project site, or the building site facing the east. So as you can see, there's not a lot of glazing or windows on this side. There will be fencing and landscaping and some courtyard area separating the existing residences to the east and this proposed building. Here is kind of what that 3D rendering was looking like. Some individual rooms with low stone veneer walls and kind of see what the landscaping is around here. And here's the conceptual landscape plan. There's an existing neighboring property access drive that's to remain in place. There's, you know, you have your eastern courtyard for residences, patient patios in the north and south side. So here's that generator, which will go actually on the roof, which is coming up in a couple of slides. Driveway entrance in there are four parking spaces on site, obviously compliant with ADA. They have to be essentially with ADA and you have some landscaping separating the parking spaces with the, between the pedestrian walkway as well. It's the sequel exemption for the, it's a project qualifies for a class 32 infill sequel exemption. It complies with the general plan and zoning. It's within city limits, less than five acres and surrounded by urban uses. There's no habit value for habitat, for rare threatened or endangered species. It will not have significant effects on traffic noise, air or water quality. Both of these two are, this is supported, substantiated by, I'm sorry, studies included in the agenda packet and it can be served by public services and utilities. Some of the largest issues raised with the neighbors, which has come up and been studied is the noise and it has to do with that generator, the backup generator on the, as originally proposed on the east side, kind of between the building and the existing residences. Since that time, there's a, the noise study included in this packet, essentially states that to comply with the city's noise ordinance, which is required, it's inherent within the code that the generator's best location actually be on the building covered with existing, I'm sorry, mechanically screened with the other HVAC equipment. So it wouldn't be here. Another one that came up, which is conditioned into the project is there's some oxygen tanks on this side and this little kind of rectangular, little pop out of the building here. So we've worked on a condition which is on the use permit resolution, which is to the, the applicant has agreed to it, to the greatest extent feasible, relocate that those oxygen tanks to the front. I'm sorry, the northwest portion of the building area. So that could be anywhere in here to, and most of that noise comes from servicing. And with that, we've also, we have also conditioned the project to limit the servicing of those oxygen tanks. The reason why it's to the greatest extent feasible is because there may be some fire code and building code that would not allow certain locations of these oxygen tanks. So we don't wanna condition it into a place where they can't put it anywhere because it's because they need it. So that would be figured out by building permit, essentially, where this little location of the oxygen tanks are. The condition also reads for servicing that it's 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. only except during emergencies. So there's, and these were conditions accepted by the applicant after having conversations with the neighbors. And as you can see the mechanical screening for the northwest portion of the roof is there. There is a bit more, there's a couple things, I don't know when it would be appropriate to mention it, but based on all of the agenda packet and the findings made planning staff recommends that the zoning administrator approve both minor conditional use permit and minor design review for the purposes of the Santa Rosa Memorial Hospice House located at 520 Doyle Park Drive, file number PRJ 20-011. And the applicant team is here. My name's again, Adam Ross is my contact information. The applicant team is here with a presentation of their own to present to the zoning administrator. And I'm able to answer any questions you may have before or after that. I'm sorry, you're muted. Yeah, thank you. Okay, so we have the conditional use permit and design review. And because this was minor design review, it does not go to design review board. It comes directly to the zoning administrator, correct? Correct. And has the applicant team submitted a revised site plan plot plan, or is what you've shown in the exhibits here in your presentation, the most recent proposal in terms of site development? These are the most recent. Something like this with, say, the generator, the backup emergency generator location. At times, staff can just condition it so that it's, you know, we don't have to redo what it looks like now because essentially what would go in here is more landscaping rather than it being or something very minor. So in this case, the condition is that or that the noise study, I should say, specifically states that the acceptable location is in this area. So that would carry forward. So staff didn't really need to see a revised site plan just for this location here. Yeah, and I concur. I think the modification here doesn't substantially otherwise, you know, substantially change the design otherwise of the project. So thank you for the clarification. And then can you elaborate a little bit on the parking there and how circulation works on the property? Yes. Yes. So as you can see, there's four parking spaces here. Part of the operational plan is that employees and volunteers park in the existing parking garage here, which is approximately 200 feet away. So we are prepared to provide a proposed condition of approval that the applicant have the language. So when there's offsite parking, normally you have to record a covenant, but since the applicant owns both locations, it would be, I have my full screen here. I'm kind of forgetting the word, but it's a reservation. Yes, thank you, Nate. It's a reservation of covenant so that if the use changes or the operator changes or the property owner changes, then they would have to record the covenant because you can't record a covenant against yourself. So one of the proposed conditions is that we have to discuss and enter into the public record is the applicant shall provide or record a reservation of covenant for offsite parking. The WTrans provided a focus traffic study, which indicated that six parking spaces comply with the 85th percentile for demand for this site. So the applicant has kind of identified more than that offsite. So there's four onsite and then there's essentially 10 more located in this parking garage for staff and volunteer at this location. And part of this use for a minor use permit, there's no minimum or maximum parking requirements that's established by the use permit. Basically the performance and demand of parking dictates what the review authority would approve for parking. And in this case, staff finds that what they have proposed is more than adequate, especially because there's also additional parking should need be up at this location of this parking garage because they're all within kind of the same ownership, they're all within the same ownership group and all serve the kind of surrounding area of these operations. All right, thank you for elaborating on that a bit further. In terms of circulation, it appears that there's a travel aisle that continues beyond the parking spaces and curves to that north property line. What happens there? Ken, I think the app Nate, if you want to jump in and kind of answer that. Sure, thanks. Hi, I'm Nate Bisbee, architect for the African team. Yeah, the driveway design was configured in collaboration with Gabe at engineering with the city, the director of that group and at the time. And along with Ian Hardidge, who's the fire marshal, assistant fire marshal. And what we're trying to do with the driveways is use existing curb cuts. So everyone liked the idea in our pre-app meeting back in 2019 that we would not be adding any curb cuts. So we developed this drive through one way driveway that utilizes the existing curb cuts and maintains the sidewalk and the nature of the sidewalk the way it is now. So that existing driveway to the north would be used as an exit for our project. And that condition would become part of a legal easement or dedication associated with that offsite use. So a vehicle entering on the south side of the frontage would continue past the parking spaces and be able to exit north of the property line. Yes. Okay, well, thank you for the clarification. That was not at all apparent. Maybe there's another exhibit that shows that... Yes, the architectural site plan. It's cropped, but it shows how this overall, how that goes. I see you have the radius there. Thank you. I was wondering how that would work. Okay, thank you. Let's see. And then just to confirm, Adam, back to you about the relocation of the generator to the northwest corner of the rooftop mechanical equipment. It is shielded. I think I saw in one elevation, a very low call out. Yeah, there we go. Okay. All right. And that's inherent in the code that it be all mechanical equipment on roofs be screened. And also I think even if it was ground mounted that we'd ask for some sort of mechanical screening. And again, the Iliworth-Rodkin noise study analyzed the project and found that with the equipment in this location, it would not be an exceedance of the property line noise limit. Correct. Okay. Okay, thank you. So now's the time I invite the project team to comment. Me do so, please raise your hand. You'll be recognized. We also have, they also have a presentation that I'll run through for them as well. And I also have one late email that I received yesterday after working hours if you would like me to kind of summarize in the record. I don't know if it's now or if it's during the public comment period or right before. I think it's appropriate you do it now. That's part of your presentation. Yes. And I apologize. Let's go back to Adam. Okay. So received from Christina Sunderlage whom we've communicated with regarding conditions for this project. It's a few bullet points and I'll summarize each. She wants, she asked that we condition the project so that the generator is not so that the generator cannot be built on the east side as shown on the plans. With that, I think it could go either way. It's inherent in the noise analysis that it won't work there, that it won't comply with the noise ordinance at that location. Should it go off or run and that the appropriate location is on the northwest roof. So staff's position is that it's inherent of where it's gonna go and it's supported by the noise ordinance which would move forward with the building permit phase. So conditioning it, should say that is somewhat redundant but if that's what is the outcome, that's fine as well. The next one is a concern. She's concerned with the water main and backflow located on the northwest corner of the property near heritage oak number 860 as identified on the harvest report. The first question is that could the water main come in from the street further south maybe closer to the existing one and farther from the oak and will someone at the meeting be able to address this? Second question is the condition of these permit spells out specific preservation measures to be taken but the pipe excavation is not mentioned. Do you think that condition 12-7 will cover the arborist to be on site for this trenching to be added to that condition? She feels that the African architect, landscape architect and hospital reps are all on board with making the best effort for the tree which truly is appreciated by the neighborhood but these intentions can often get lost on the construction site. So being as specific as possible for a condition helps. So the, in the use permit resolution there are requirements for tree preservation which have to be identified on the grading plan set and the applicant may have some more information as far as the location of the water mains. I as well staff doesn't want to condition something that may prohibit the project from actually being built or creating a problem via last minute or something that wasn't necessarily, there wasn't time to vet it out. So writing a condition saying, moving it, the applicant shall move the water main. That's kind of out of the wheelhouse of planning to make, we could agree to it but then when they go to engineering for the improvement plans, it may become an issue. So, and again, there are conditions written that are referenced that require to the best extent feasible how to, what's required on the improvement plans for tree protection zones, drip zones, roots during excavation and the like. So staff feels it's properly conditioned in that sense. And at that point, it's, you know it's figured out at the building permit phase, building a grading permit phase between the applicant team on what they can do and what engineering would allow as well. This is Nate, I can add a couple of notes, the comment. One moment, I had a question here before we go into that, Nate. And you'll have opportunity, I'm sorry, we were gonna go into the applicant's presentation but let me finish on a thread of thought here with Adam. The Arborist Proport prepared for the project identifies various tree protection measures that focus on this particular tree in question. Is that right? So, yes. Okay. And part of those tree protection measures include prohibition on work within a protection zone, the root zone that'll be marked, is trenching allowed within that zone and would the backflow prevention device be located within that area? So, the backflow prevention device, I don't know if I can answer that question correctly. Okay. Maria, at this time. Can I see his, this is here, we might ask him, but yeah. But as there are protections, there are, exactly as you said, to protect this specific tree and other trees on the site for root zone and drip line and the like. So, if there were to be any trenching, I'd imagine that those would have to be in place or as required. So, these are clarifying questions I'm asking now and we'll come back to this matter when the meeting, public expression or meeting portion of this item is closed. I'll have opportunity to ask our, I see his, who's Mekige's in attendance who drafted the exhibit A requirements. So, that, does that conclude your public comment? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Condition 14.4 mentions the mountain height of lighting fixtures and parking areas and storing storage areas, shall not exceed 16 feet in height, lower mountain heights are encouraged. She did not see any pole type lighting on the plan or cut sheet info are any to be used. If not, she thinks that number four should be removed or the max height given is a typical path baller height on the East building side. Two, she says two bullets and one wall sconce, one four inch recessed down light. So this, the project, that condition is essentially just restating what's required for outdoor lighting in the code. It really doesn't even have to be in there. It was just added for further clarification. So there's no max height on buildings for wall-mounted lights on buildings. What that's referring to are light standards, which are light poles. So, which are required for parking areas mostly. So you have a one acre foot candle, one candle foot lighting lumens requirement for parking areas where people go at night. And that's a public health and safety code that you can't get out of. It's figured out at the building permit. The reason why you don't see any of those cut sheets is they haven't done the photometric plan for that to show which would dictate where the light poles would go. However, all of those light poles are required to be down lit and capped to avoid any light pollution. And there may be lighting throughout the walkways that are ballards and low-level lights for the residences, but anything to do on the side facing Doyle Park Drive would comply with those requirements in the city's lighting ordinance. All right, well, I'll ask the question of the applicant about their intention on light standards. I do see the light study or their program includes ballards and wall fixtures, ceiling mounts as well. So we can get into that later. Okay, and then you had some other issues. One more. It states that parking for hospital staff, sales contractors, service people, et cetera, has been an issue in the neighborhood. They currently have a two hour parking limit that was implemented years ago. And the desire to see parking condition with the project is to prevent future friction. She mentions that visitors to the site is probably gonna be minimal at times, but the campus, the unplanned campus at large is what creates the overall parking problem is the traffic study. She references the traffic study, and then references a condition is to minimize the impact of the project on the neighborhood, on street parking supply. Visitors should be encouraged to use the nearby parking structures by distributing maps and directions to visitors when posting this information online and is in favor of that. The thing about that is it's not enforceable by city staff. So there's gonna be the offsite parking reservation of Covenant for the offsite parking. And I think that's essentially it. There's, you know, we can't enforce this. That's their internal operation requirements and staff's not inclined to condition a project that is an unenforceable condition. Okay. Does that conclude public comments? Correct. Thank you. And we'll have obviously opportunity, give opportunity for the public to comment. But now I'd like to offer the opportunity for the project applicant and the team to comment on the understanding of a presentation. Adam, why don't you load that and invite the presentation by the team. Thank you. Hi, this is Nate Busby, architect for the project team. And I'm with me, Gary Johansson. Gary, do you wanna jump in? Adam, can you advance the slide one? Thank you. Oh, I'm Gary Johansson. I'm a physician in Sonoma County. I've been here 45 years and been part of the hospice programs for 40 years and with St. Joseph Health, almost 30 years. And I wanna thank you all for being here today to help us in this critical step towards realizing a dream we've had of a residential hospice house for our community. As you may know, all of you Providence, well, St. Joseph, now Providence, St. Joseph has run an exemplary hospice program for our community for over 20 years now. And this model has been a delivery of care into the home setting with a professional team that can really help not only address symptoms, but also the other stressors that families and patients feel spiritually, emotionally, practically in the home setting. And along that line though, it's unfortunate that some patients can't die at home and there's a number of reasons for that. And that's why the leaders at St. Joseph for years have looked for an opportunity to develop an alternate setting where those folks can go for a dignified and quality death experience as much as possible. For a variety of reasons, these are also very difficult to fund and so philanthropy comes to play. And right now we're fortunate to have had the clinicians, the hospital administrator folks, a great team of technical and design experts, as well as a number of generous philanthropic donors all kind of come together and the stars align in a way that we feel we're on the verge now of being able to really launch the stream to a reality. In this facility, it's where patients can come whose symptoms are difficult to treat at home. Places where people can come who have no home or whose caregiver in the home, their spouse. Gary, we lost you. It's a place where patients' families can come who need a brief respite period. And ultimately it's a place where people can come who otherwise would need to die in the hospital or a skilled nursing facility. And a place though where their needs will be very well met and give them a sense of peace. This site will be designed for relatively short stays. It'll have a round the clock team of dedicated, specially selected and trained personnel from both nursing, physician, social work, chaplaincy all together as a team like the regular hospice to provide the care to patients. So family members will be able to be there around the clock as well. But they'll also be able to leave with the assurance that their loved one will be well watched while they're gone whether it's caring for their other family needs, getting freshened up, going to work for a few hours and that sort of thing. So families will have the trust that they will be leaving their loved one in a safe place when they need to leave. The grounds will be a very special spot designed and well-tended to provide comfortable outdoor areas for contemplation, for kind of relaxation. And contrary to the busy kind of a hustle, bustle of a hospital or skilled nursing facility this area will be, this facility will be designed with a peace and tranquility that will be as much home-like as can be. Some patients will go on to be discharged alive and to another setting, whether it's a home or some long-term facility if they're gonna be surviving a lot longer, but many will die here. And I'm gonna be able to die in a way where their families and the compassionate team will be there to help them on their way. So I'm really pleased and honored that we'll be able to bring this to our community in the near future, this amazing asset. And really the first one of its kind in our entire North Bay region here. So I'm very happy to have you all take a look a little closer at it with Nate now. Thank you. Open any questions as well. Thank you very much, Mr. Johansson. And I will invite other members of your team to make a comment. Thanks, Gary. Adam, can you go to the next slide? Overview, I'm just gonna give, try to give a relatively brief presentation to just talk about the process a little bit and the overall ideas and represent the information in the application really. So this design narrative information is contained in the application. The process of developing the project has been a long process, including a lot of interaction with the city at many levels and the various departments within the city, including our earliest consultation with the city two plus years ago for this particular property and the site. We held a pre-app meeting with leadership in each division at the city in June of 2019 with this proposal and it helped shape some of the elements of the proposal I mentioned the driveway that was shaped by that pre-app meeting. Some of the EVA requirements associated with fire access around the property have been shaped by that early meeting. The goals for the parking and the frontage by that early meeting as well and some of the subsequent feedback we've received from the city. So we've adapted the plan to those needs along the way. We held a neighborhood meeting in July 2019, a public meeting and got some excellent feedback regarding trees in particular, regarding noise. Noise feedback led us to a professional acoustic engineer studying the mechanical equipment for the project and then we submitted in June of last year and incorporated additional feedback like the noise study updates to the traffic study and the harvest report and resubmitted the application in November. So we're here now to bring this information to you. Generally, as we've talked about, this is really a quiet function and it's very much patient centered. The core of the project to the patient rooms where patients and families come together. So it has this interior quality with some use of the exterior. The important elements of the rooms is that one important element of the rooms is that they have a nice connection to daylight so that patients in the room can have the sun come in. It doesn't feel like it enclosed type of space and that they can have in some cases some sight lines to greenery. The building uses Adam mentioned is a nice transition in the proposal in terms of scale and function between the neighbors to the south and the east and the commercial and medical uses to the north and the west. The one story building feels right. The really low traffic impact is important to mention and just generally this is a residential occupancy. So we have this nice bridging function between the two. Adam, can you go to the next? Thanks. You can skip this one. This is our cover slide for our design plans forward. Oh, okay. Our challenges and opportunities. As we mentioned, we work closely with the neighbors and with any project, these are goals of any project really is to integrate the project in the neighborhood context, address trees and landscape concerns and really develop the property for its long term, long-term goals in terms of landscape and the looking field of property. I'll talk more about that later. Traffic and parking. We've done focus traffic study Adam mentioned, mechanical equipment noise has been incorporated and actually that noise study really became instrumental in the positioning of a mechanical equipment on the site and then exterior lighting lights built. These are all typical issues on all projects but just to say that we've been given special attention to cutoff demonstrating where the cutoffs occur, where the lights occur and even interior lights built with the inclusion of blackout lines in response to a neighbor request for the blackout lines at night. Sustainable design is on our list and the city's list. So I just wanted to mention that the project is green. It's sustainably designed. This is just a critical part of any project that we do and participate in. And so the project's going to be very energy efficient. It's gonna utilize green material inside and out. And I just wanted to mention that geotechnical design has been an aspect to the project that's influenced the position of the building. The Rogers Creek fault is adjacent to the property actually runs along the back property line. So there's a no build zone identified on plans that came out of an extensive geotechnical review of that condition. And that's just something that's been a physical factor in the placement of the building. Next. Next. The neighborhood context on this map, you can see, I don't know if you can see my cursor, but Doyle Park is running, this is facing north, there's aerial view. Doyle Park runs between Montgomery on the north, Sonoma on the south. Sonoma is the bicycle boulevard on the bicycle master plan. It's also location of a bus stop both sides of the street. We feel like this is a great location for us in the sense that we have the potential to be very connected to public transportation options for visitors to patients in hospice. You can see also the medical uses above the parking garage Adam pointed out. And then the neighboring residential areas on Talbot, I think the next street's called Macklin. And then Doyle Park kind of zigzags across the middle into the south by the French Charter School, the pharmacy and the mortuary adjacent. Go to the next. Landscape plan, next. Just zooming into landscape plan so you can see it better. You know, we talked about this, but you can see the patient patios flanking the north perimeter and the south perimeter. The setbacks are larger on the south and that's intentional to really make sure that we're creating this kind of buffer, landscape buffer between the neighbors and the project. And so all the garden spaces are on the south. We also want to preserve those trees that are offsite. So tree preservation extends to the offsite locations and then enhance those with the introduction of new specimen oak trees here at the back of the property and also here at the front. So the long-term goal is that the identity of the arrival point at the front of the property and the gardens in the back is dominated by new specimen oaks. And those will have a different age to the existing oaks that are at the front of the property and start to work together to kind of think about the long-term vision for this. Tree number 860, I think is the one that was mentioned in the earlier. So this is tree 860, it's in the front of the property. We'll be preserving that following the outlines in the obviously in the harvest report. We can work with, we'll continue to work with the city and the design team to locate utilities so they're not disturbing the tree. I mean, enough said there, I guess that's kind of where we are with that. The goal is to preserve the tree, is identified by the harvest at the outset as had potential to be preserved. So we committed to that and that's what we're going to do. Our team's really expert in this. We have engineers, landscape architects and professional harvest who will provide a third-party sort of oversight for anything, especially the excavation elements that I think were brought up, but also review the design to be sure that we're careful in the placement of those meters, for example. So that's something that will continue to develop as the project develops and we have more detail on that. You can see the generator in the back generator will not be located in the back. I'll show you another exhibit that clarifies that, but the noise study also is presented as an option one and two and contains diagrammatic representation that eliminates that generator. So there is documentation in the application that shows the generator not in the project when the generator is located on the roof or not on the grade when it's located on the next. Next, just zooming in on this, you can see that driveway handy that turn. So this is a fire turn. So this aisle, this one-way aisle has to be accessible to the fire department. So they will come here. They'll also have access down in the adjacent driveway to the back should they need to enter in this back gate. So there's sort of a fire perimeter around the project and accessibility to the outside of the building. And I think you covered this one pretty well, Adam, next. I wanted to include these slides because they show that rooftop mechanical equipment, the way it's proposed and the elimination of the enclosure in the back. This is just massing studies of the 3D next. This massing study shows the continuation of sidewalk in the front, the driveway entry, parking and an exit, the incorporation of trees. This slide shows the rooftop mechanical at the Northwest and no enclosure for generator in the back. Next, next. Just zooming into the floor plan. The floor plan is this really simple organization of three parts. There's an entry, small lobby type vestibule and nursing station with all the public functions in the Southwest corner, all of the staff functions in the Northwest corner with all the mechanical equipment directly above. And then the patient rooms at the back of the property, patios to the South, patios to the North. Next. Some imagery, next. Adam, you did a good job describing this too. I mean, the idea of the project and the materiality of the project is that we use a lot of natural finishes, that they're simple, that the pallet is simple. Woods, stone, warm finishes, not bright accent colors, and that we're integrating landscapes with the facade. There's also the use of this vertical fiber cement board, which is a nod to the neighborhood. Next. Living area in the front, next. The patios here, one important aspect of sustainable design actually in wellness in general is that your patients in a position in a patient room have the ability of folks inside of any building have the ability to see out. So what these low walls allows to do is to connect the landscape at the perimeter of the gardens to the interior, which is an important aspect of wellness and sustainable design these days. You can see, as Adam mentioned, this low profile of the overall room form really brought the roof down on the neighbor side to the South. Next. And the patient rooms, again, you get an idea of that desire to have some kind of sight line from the bed position to plants, to trees, and the existing trees in the new oaks, which will flank the South side. It just, just something that small and that simple, we really feel is important. These are the windows that will be shaded at night. These are for clear stories so that there's not light being broadcast at night out towards the neighbors. Next. And the materials pallet, really simple and intended to complement the landscape so that that way the landscape comes part of the materials pallet of the project. Thank you. I had such an awesome question. Are the, is a clear story on the backside of the building, windows facing North and South, and you mentioned that they would be shielded or covered at night. How would that happen? Yeah. Can you hear me? Yes. Yes, okay. So in the application packet, there's some detailed cross sections through the building and there's a couple of things that the cross sections reveal. One is they show the mechanical enclosure with the generator height and the screen height. So we've got that covered there. That was something that came up earlier in the conversation with Adam. And then in the interior rooms, there's a cross section to the rooms. We call for blackout shades, automated blackout shades on those upper windows. And the neighbors have requested that since day one, since our neighbor application or our neighbor meeting in July, 2019. And that's just been something we've incorporated into the project from the beginning. In the more recent comments a couple of weeks ago, we had them on the South only and they requested that we put them on the North as well. And we've agreed to do that. And I believe that's a condition of approval. Thank you for clarifying that. And then in terms of your lighting fixtures, you contemplate illuminating the parking area using the baller lights or did you plan standards? The plan is to use low lighting on the project. What we don't know yet is how the street will be illuminated or requested to be illuminated by the city. And you can see the proximity of the frontage there. We'll have street trees along the frontage. So our hope is to work with the city on what kind of lighting is required that the street and incorporate our lighting plan into that. I don't, is there a possibility that we will have a full light? I think that's possible. I'm not gonna say it's not, but would it be if it was required, would it be a full cutoff? Would it be limited and high by the city ordinances? Yes and yes. And, looking at the location is the furthest possible position from any neighbors. So we feel confident we can make that happen if we need to have a full light there. But the first goal would be to do it at grade. We have kind of a lot of factors like tree preservation that is a better factor in that choice. But yeah, that's where we are with that right now just to clarify as much as best I can. So lights on standards or pull lights aren't contemplated towards the rear half of the property, let's say in the courtyard area at the back? Absolutely not. Okay, thank you. All right. And you answered the question regarding the generator location. And I appreciate the design efforts you made to make it scale or transition between the more institutional medical facilities to the north and the residential to the east and west or east and south. So I appreciate that. Is there any other member of your team who wishes to comment at this point? I think we're okay. Okay, seeing none, I'll move now on to public comments. Those of you who are in attendance that wish to comment, please raise your hand if you're on the Zoom call or if you're on telephone, you need to press star nine and I do see one caller with a number ending in 81.93. Please press star nine. If you wish to comment, you'll be able to do so. And that recording secretary, yes, thank you. Once you've unmuted yourself, I think you have to actually can recording secretary, can you provide instructions for a caller to how to unmute themselves? And also- From here, it looks like, yeah, there you go. You just start talking. Oh, hi. Hi, we can hear you. Yeah, we can hear you. Okay, do you want me to go now or wait? Yeah, it's on you. Get your name if you wish and please provide your comments. Sure, it's Christina Sunderlage and I live directly east of the project and we share property lines with the hospital. So I think the presentation has been great. I also have commended in the past and wish to also do so publicly that we think the use of the hospital's house is perfectly suited with the residential zoning. And I think all the neighbors really, I can't say exactly, but most of the neighbors are pretty on board with this project and they've been very respectful in listening to our concerns, et cetera. So I'll just get on with a couple of things that came up just now. And that is that I realized after I wrote my late night email last night that in the noise study, there was nothing mentioned of the oxygen tanks. They were shown on the plans early on as an enclosed oxygen tank structure on the east side of the building, which is still where it's shown now. Excuse me. But nothing in the noise study showed that that was addressed. All the other HVAC and the generator obviously were. But, and I don't know if that's because oxygen tanks themselves don't make noise. It's the servicing that makes the noise and from neighbors of the general Memorial Hospital campus can attest to and have written in about, that is very, very disturbing that the trucks beep when they're backing up, the clanging of the tanks. And in the past at the main campus, the servicing has happened at all hours, three in the morning, four in the morning. Some neighbors have trekked over there to talk to the guys, that they leave the beep around the whole time. And so that is an issue with the location of the oxygen tank where it's shown now because what they would do would be to back down the driveway of 510 Doyle Park Drive, which is the medical office building directly to the north of this property. And if they are leaving their beepers on there, that's very close to all the neighbors on Talbot Avenue or a lot of the neighbors on Talbot Avenue. So I'm just bringing that up. I don't know why that wasn't addressed in the noise study. And I do feel that any kind, just in general, any of the conditions that the hospital is not opposed to adding with regards to the Oak Tree preservation, the utilities, I heard Nate say that they will be working with the city to look at the best location for that with the tree preservation, that's great. But I always feel that more is better and there's a little strength in a condition. So if a hospital is not opposed adding or strengthening a condition about the trenching, I think would be important. And also about the parking, that reservation of a covenant condition that Adam mentioned early on, I thought sounded really good and it did sound like the applicant was not opposed to that. So those are my main thoughts and I thank everyone for all their efforts. And I thank you for your comments. Thank you and written in verbal. And I will respond to those in the next portion of the meeting. But I wish to turn now to give anybody else an opportunity who wishes to comment, who might have interest in the project. Please, if so, please raise your hand or press star nine if you're on the telephone. All right, I see none. So I will close the public meeting portion of this item. And this gives me opportunity to ask questions and connect the dots here. So I think the application is thorough and responsive. Clearly, the team from Memorial Hospice House has been working with neighbors to respond to their concern. The one that just comes up immediately is regarding the placement of the oxygen tanks, recognizing they're probably not a noise source, but I think there's a good point about servicing. I realized there's a condition of approval that says that cannot happen outside the hours of seven a.m. and seven p.m. But would it be feasible for those tanks to be located towards the front of the property in proximity where the mechanical equipment is? And I'll ask the project team to respond. Yeah, this is Nate Bisbee. Thanks, thanks, Andy. Yeah, we're not 100% sure. This comment came up last week to try to incorporate that location in the project. We intend to give it every effort. There are potentially side yard compliance issues with the north location that Chris had identified. That could be an issue. There's a vehicle area. We have to make sure that the oxygen tanks and they're really cylinders. They're about six inch circular four foot tall cylinders. There's eight to 10 of them. They're not big tanks and they're kind of grouped under this small roof. So our intention would be to place them in the area on the landscape plan that's identified as vehicle area, if possible. And we have every intention to do that. We would prefer that location in terms of searchability and that's the goal. That's what I can say at this point. And we did talk with Chris about this in a lot of detail on phone and exchange and emails. And so, I mean, I can give that assurance that we're gonna put our best effort in to make that happen. I'm not in a position to guarantee it right at the moment. The one other comment on the noise study, the reason it's not on the noise study is that they make no noise and there's nothing in the noise ordinance that the acoustician could respond to in terms of service of oxygen tanks that don't make noise. So it was something they had to remain mute about in their estimation, but there is servicing. So that's reality. Thank you. And if I may add, condition of approval, number seven of the use permit resolution reads, the applicant shall to the greatest extent feasible relocate the oxygen tanks to the Northwest side of the building. The final location shall be determined prior to issuance of building permit. So it kind of lets it up to be, it puts it on the applicant to reinforce what they were stating that they'll do their best to do it. And the reason why we didn't specifically, and I touched on this in the presentation, the reason why we didn't specifically say it shall be is because there may be contradictory fire code or building code for separations or what have you. So even if planning said, yeah, no problem, it may be a building code requirement that it ends up, it can't be there. Adam, can you share the landscape site plan for all to look at? And if you're able to enlarge it on the screen. Thank you. So the question I have, and what I heard in the presentation that the access to the tanks at the rear of the building will be from the adjoining property to the north in order to do this routine service. And looking at the landscape plan here, I do see that there's a pathway, a walkway that goes to the property line. Is that intended to be connected to the property to the north? And I'm asking the project team. That's actually a gutter, a curb gutter. The tanks could be serviced actually from the front through the back patio pathway. So we're not even searching that the access could happen from the north. That was the original idea. There's a parking lot in the back there. It's sort of made sense, it's closer. We could potentially service the oxygen even if it's located in the back. Delivery trucks could be at the street or in the driveway. And the servicing could happen on the south boundary. This would be a service person with a dolly walking along the sidewalk, along the south past the patios and then around the back of the project. So that's a potential way that that location could be serviced without vehicle backing happening on the north, which I think it sounds like a concern. What control do you have over the delivery vehicle driver and how they approach and do the servicing? Could they not choose to come in to the back corner because it's more convenient or is there a way that you could require that they enter the property of the hospice house from the street cut from frontage? I think we could work to require that. I mean, personally, I have no control over them, but if there could be a condition or a modification to the condition that servicing if the front location of the, because we're still gonna try to move them into the front, in which case they would be serviced from the front, obviously. So maybe there's a modification to the condition that allows if that front northwest corner is infeasible for oxygen tank location that servicing remain from the front. And then that's that that become part of the planned maintenance approach for those tanks. And I think that's appropriate because really the facility should be self-sufficient with regard to these sort of activities. In other words, access that's provided to the property from the street should be sufficient to gain and do the operations or maintenance activities and to have such as these tanks located where it might be necessary or more practical, expedient for the servicing to happen on an adjoining property, which Memorial Hospital now owns, but may not in the future. I just think it's not good site planning to set up that potential reliance that might be difficult to maintain. So what I would like to do and I'll all of, I guess now is appropriate time to talk about condition number seven. I'm gonna put it in front of me or Adam, if you could put it in front of me or put it on the screen so we could share. I think it's, the condition can appropriately be strengthened that if you can enlarge that please. Yeah, I don't know if you can do it further. I can't read the problem out, but I will, condition number seven currently reads the applicant shall to the extent feasible, greatest extent feasible relocate the oxygen tank to the Northwest side of the building, final location shall be determined prior to issuance of the building permit. I like to turn the emphasis a little bit on this to say the applicant shall relocate the oxygen tank to the Northwest side of the building unless it is infeasible due to fire code or building code requirements or prohibited by. And then the final location shall be determined prior to accepting the building permit. I want this matter to be resolved prior to the issuance. So I would like that the location be worked out and that the building permit that is submitted for review to the city as it resolves and that'll give the project planner opportunity to confirm that this new location can work or why it cannot work. So that's a recommended modification to number seven. And then otherwise I do think all mechanical equipment services shall be limited to, I would add here including maintenance or replacement of oxygen tanks or any other kind of tank shall be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. So just amplify number nine to include the oxygen tanks. Okay. Well, it was left out because it was considered mechanic. I just considered it mechanical equipment. So I'll just call out that. Yeah. I think it just given it's such a, it's an issue here. Let's address it. Can I, Jesus, can I, Miki, can I ask you to comment? I have a question regarding a trenching site development, trenching requirements for the backflow prevention device and how it relates to the oak tree preservation. If we could recognize you and have you give us some information about your thinking. Hi, good morning. This is Jesus McKaig. Can everyone hear me? Perfect. Okay, excellent. I'm Jesus McKaig, staff engineer in PED assigned to this project. And your question was about the placement of backflow in meters. Is it, do I answer or may I repeat it please? Yes, and then the related trenching to service or to connect that device and whether that is by necessity having to enter the tree protection zone. Essentially the placement of the meter and backflow is preferred to be linear from where the service lateral is installed. So it doesn't have to be at an exact certain spot along the front edge. It's, see, I have kind of, I have the information here as to how it's preferred to be placed. They, it's preferred to be placed apart from sewer lateral by at least five feet and away at least 10 feet from street trees, so on and so forth. But apart from that, it can be moved anywhere along there where it will work. And outside of driveway is preferably as well. So it's not subject to being driven over. Is it, well, we have the driveway crossing the entire frontage, correct? So there's really no place for a sewer line to avoid that in this instance. Is it, is the linear alignment towards this backflow prevention device along the north boundary of the property where the oak tree is or is it on the south side? What is the preferred alignment at this point? Okay, so when I'm referring to the driveway, I'm not referring to the on-site private driveway. I'm actually referring to the curb pet. So it would be, the preferred location for the backflow would be right back-of-sidewalk in the PUE. And the meter box would normally be in the planter if there were one or the meter box itself. It's less restricted because it has that lid it can be walked on. And if it had to be subject to drive weight to traffic in a traffic meter, sorry, traffic appropriate lid. But apart from that, anywhere where there's no conflict like trees or any of that sort of thing, other equipment that's there, it is fine. So avoiding that tree is not gonna be a problem. I don't think. Okay, so the final analysis, the backflow and the meter and the trenching to support it or to get the lines in can avoid the root and tree protection zone. Yes. Okay, excellent. Thank you, appreciate that. Happy to help. You wouldn't know by chance anything about oxygen tanks and location and application of fire or building code requirements that might prevent them being placed in the northwest corner of the building. Is there anything that jumps out at you? Unfortunately, that's outside of my purview, really the onsite development. It cannot be placed in the PUE, but apart from that on the site, I can't really say with any certainty. And is I don't have the benefit of the site plan or the engineering plan in front of me as a PUE. Is there a PUE located along the north property line between the building and the property line? So the place where the PUE will be located, it's yet to be dedicated, but it's seven feet back of sidewalk along the frontage. Okay, it doesn't go into the property, it's along the frontage, right? That's the standard PUE. Okay, thank you. Thank you for attending, appreciate it. Absolutely. Okay, so with regard to the parking reservation and parking requirements, the comment I would make here, this type of use would probably have relatively low parking demand, and it was so found by the traffic parking analysis submitted for the project. There is the practical issue that Memorial Hospital has dealt with by providing a reservation of parking for its employees at the nearby structure. So I'm supportive of the findings of the traffic study that they're, in this case, there won't be spillover neighborhood parking impacts as a result here of this use. So I think the main concern I have now is are we adequately conditioning or memorializing the parking accommodation on the property in this resolution? And I have two resolutions, and Mr. Ross, is it more appropriate to have that laid out clearly in the design review resolution, which I'm looking at right now, or the use permit resolution? For parking, I think it's a use permit issue. There may be some, if you were to say, for the, say for condition number eight, the project shall blackout blinds on all clear story windows. That should, that one's more appropriate in the design review resolution, but for parking, I think it should go on this use permit. I will also note that there is a condition of approval in the designer view resolution stating compliance with all conditions of approval in the use permit. And one reason why they're all loaded into the use permit, even though they're more something like condition of approval number eight is more specific to the designer view is that when in looking at the conditions of approval in the future, when it comes to grading and improvement plans, they're in one location rather than some here, some there. So that was the thought behind that. That makes sense. Okay, so what's your recommendation in terms of memorializing the parking situation? And I do think the findings for the use permit should also reference that traffic study and its conclusion about parking. So it's really clear. You did so with the noise ordinance, which, so there are two changes. I want to return to the addition of a potential parking condition. But before I do that, I want to recommend two changes to the findings. First is bullet number three, which calls out or references the noise study. I think it's fine that it be included there, but I think it's also a really important substantial evidence for the finding number five, which is the classic use permit finding regarding the project will not constitute a nuisance or be injurious or detrimental to the people living in the area. I would like that finding to be revised to recognize two things. One is that the noise ordinance found with a relocated generator to the northwest corner that there would not be a significant or that there would be an exceedance of the city's noise standard. And then I think secondly, we do need to acknowledge here parking that the traffic study found that the proposed use would not create, that it provides adequate parking and that Memorial Hospital has reserved how many spaces, eight spaces, or employees, what's up the number? I believe it is six plus four. Six plus four, okay. So six spaces in the nearby. And in the parking garage, sorry. In the parking garage, okay. So I think it's really important that the findings are specific to the project. And in this case, clearly we have issues that we're identifying here in the findings so that the future reader will understand how the conditions of approval were approached and why they're there. It provides justification for the conditions. So those are additions or modifications to the findings. And then for the conditions of approval, I'm just, Adam, I'm just looking through the list to see if we can add it to an existing condition or. For parking? Yeah. So I think it has to be its own new condition stating that as proposed or as identified in the traffic study by W.Tran stated, I think it was November, 2020, offsite parking for staff and volunteers shall be dedicated in the parking garage north of the site. Reserves, yeah. Reserves in the parking site and a reservation covenant shall be implemented or recorded on the property. And further that the four parking spaces on the property are reserved for visitors. Okay. Now I want to ask the applicant team, does that new parking condition comport with how you intend the facility will work in terms of where staff is parking, where your guests are coming? Yes. I would only add that there are 10 stalls to be reserved in the parking garage, six to cover the staff count and four additional for additional visitors to be directed if they're staying longer into the garages rather than the street parking. Okay. All right. All right. So what I'd like to do, Adam, let's write now that condition into the record, recognizing it will be wordsmith in the final, but will be substantially the same. So if you could repeat what that parking condition should do, then we can maybe put that to bed. Sure. I'll try and get it all back. I was identified in the WTrans November 2012 focus traffic study. On-site parking shall be dedicated to, I'm sorry, that was visitors. Yeah. Visitors and 10 off-site parking spaces shall be provided in the parking garage. Parking garage, north of the site, I will put in the specific address once you're after this. North of the site for, it was six staff and four volunteers. We wanted to be specific about that. Is that what it was? But it was four visitors. And six staff and four volunteers, right? Is that what it was? Visitors, four visitors. Visitors. And shall require a reservation covenant, covenant running with the land. Is that right? I think so. Why don't you read it through and we'll, as I said, we can wordsmith it later. I just wanna make sure that the numbers and the idea is consistent with the intent. As identified in the focus traffic study by WTrans, dated, I think it's, again, we'll get the specific date, but November 2020, on-site parking shall be dedicated before, I'll say before on-site parking spaces, shall be dedicated to visitors. And 10 off-site parking spaces shall be provided in the parking garage north of the site for six staff and four visitors and shall require a reservation covenant running with the land. Perfect. Applicate, do you agree? Yes. Okay. Great. And then Adam will modify the findings to insert those two studies. The final thing I just wanna comment on, I don't think there's need for any change, is concerning lighting here. I'm completely sensitive to that impact of a facility such as this, even though this is a pretty quiet facility, it inevitably will have much more lighting that is typical from a residential type use that surrounds it. So I think the proposed lighting scheme, the cut sheets provided, chilling bollards and downcast ceiling lights and wall sconces completely fulfills the intent to minimize the project's lighting impact on the residential uses next door, but at the same time providing safety necessary for that facility to be accessible in reality 24 hours a day. And with regard to lighting at the front, I understand it's not really known that there would be a need for standards or not. That's gonna be part of the final review, but I would encourage here that if this could, the front parking area and driveway can be lit by the bollards, that would be great. But I recognize too that again, for safe operations of that facility, there may be a need for a standard, but that the location of that standard with cutoffs and that kind of thing would have very limited effect if at all any to the residential uses nearby. So I'm with that satisfied that the lighting plan is sufficient. Adam, do you have a comment? Yeah, I have two more for you. One is that after this meeting, there are to clean up kind of some formatting of the resolution for the use permit and also it has nothing to do with the substance of the resolution, it's just fixing where certain things fall on the page as far as conditions go, as well as a final condition which is related to the SQL finding for Habitat. And so it was erroneously excluded from the use permit resolution and I could read a version of what I've drafted which has been applied to other projects similar to this. It's again, it's one of those things that's inherent in the requirements for new development. You're okay with that? Yeah, please read it out and we'll include it. If so it reads, if ground disturbing or tree removal activity takes place between February 1st and October 1st, a survey of subject trees for nesting raptors shall be conducted no more than 72 hours prior to tree removal activities. The survey must be completed by a certified ornithologist, licensed biologist or licensed arborist. If the survey detects the presence of nesting raptors tree removal activities must be placed on hold until a time determined by the licensed professional. What actually what this is, what it should also include are ground nesting birds which are passerine birds, which is typical to this condition. So it should state that ground disturbing activities. And I think it's, so it should be, and it should be submitted to, so before a building permit is pulled, if ground disturbing activities are to take place between February 1st and October 1st, a survey for nesting birds shall be conducted prior to issuance of the grading permit as approved by the project planner. Correct, okay. Thank you, so that'll be an additional new condition number. You have a new condition, I guess 15 regarding parking. This will be new condition 16 regarding nesting, okay. And then, so I just wanna summarize the changes here. So first we're going to modify the findings to amplify the studies relative to noise and parking. And then there'll be formatting, there'll be changes in the formatting of the document, but not any substance. There will be a modification to condition number seven which we read out previously that'll essentially require the relocation of the oxygen tanks to the Northwest corner of the building unless it's prohibited by a fire or building code requirement. And that shall be validated or confirmed at the time of the building permit application by the project planner. We will amplify and condition number eight that all mechanical equipment services including oxygen tanks shall be limited to the hour specified. We, let's see. And then we added a new parking condition that Adam read out regarding reserve parking for visitors on site and then reserve parking for staff and visitors offsite. And now a condition will be added regarding, is that an avian nesting protection mitigation measure? Yes, okay. All right, so those are a number of changes. I appreciate your patience working through this. I think, well, before I continue, is there any question? I invite both the applicant and if the neighbor is still on the call, I don't see that she is. Oh, yes, I am. Okay, if you have any questions, please ask them now. I'll also tell you, we can send the conditions of approval, the final resolution to you so you can review it in its final form. And if there's any question or if you desire to appeal, you'll be able to act from the final document. Are there any questions? I invite those now. Great, am I on? Yes. Thank you so much. I really appreciate all your thoughtful, additions and comments. And especially about the lighting, it sounds like you've been impacted yourself probably at some point. One thing I thought you were going to add to the condition which I thought was a great idea, which was condition number seven, back to the darn oxygen tanks. You had also stated earlier that you would like to modify the condition if those tanks have to stay on that east side enclosure, which they might have to, that you would require that the maintenance activities stay on the same property and you had very good reasons about not, you know, having to impose on a neighboring property and cause those conditions could change in the future. Is there a reason you didn't add that to number seven? It would have been condition number nine, all the technical services. Did you add that to nine? I did not modify number nine to include that access shall be solely taken from the property, from the street to the property. And I will, I thought it was an oversight on my part. I think that's important. So. Okay, great. I do too. My only other comment was that, which I did state in my email, my late night email last night, but on the east, so the most important, you know, side for the lighting considerations are the east and the south side, which face the neighbors directly. So all on the south, it's, you see that there are walls, sconces at the patios, and they're appropriately down, just shooting the light down, et cetera, and ballards, pathway ballards. And then as you asked specifically, there would be no pole lights in the garden areas in the back south and east side. So on the back of the building, on the east elevation, there's one wall sconce that I saw and there's a recessed can light at the door. There's a back door there and it has like a metal overhang. So there's a recessed sconce that was shown on the plan and called out and I don't know if I have what sheet it is. Yes, it was on sheet A14 of Nate's plan. It was called out as a four inch recessed down light fixture. But then in the cut sheets, the recessed down light fixture is a 12 or 13 inch diameter. And I have a feeling that when you look at the spread beam on that fixture that's in the cut sheet, it's pretty wide, that landing isn't that wide. I just would like Nate to review that to make sure that when that light hits the building wall, that glare that happens when that happens is very, very bright. And we have that at 510 Doyle Park Drive, which unfortunately has not been able to be fixed by Memorial Hospital in two or three years that we've been asking for it to be fixed. So this happens down the road that it's hard to deal with a very large entity and correct things that are impacting the hood. So I just think, I think that it's possible that there's some discrepancy there, but there's a huge difference between a four inch can light and a 12 inch can light. And I just would like Nate to review that and pick something that's less obtrusive because it is gonna be 24 seven as you noted. So thank you again for all of your assistance. Thank you. All right. Any other comments or questions or responses like the project team at this point before I take five? No, thank you. Okay. All right. Well, again, I think we have well-described and documented plans and reports that have been presented. We do have in place now modified conditions that will help to ensure the noise, lighting, parking concerns will be addressed. Project planner is tasked as they are to help to make sure they get implemented at the time of the building permit application. And certainly by the time the building permit is issued for construction, I'll add to that concern, tree protection and the raptor or tree nesting requirement. I really appreciate the flexibility of the project team and also the responsiveness of the neighbors on this issue. So with that, I will approve the project with modified findings and conditions. And I will also say that because of the modifications in place, we'll make sure as I think we always do, is that the final resolution can be reviewed in detail during the appeal period. So thank you all so much for participating. This is the last item on today's agenda and it's been a pleasure. And I will now bring the meeting to close at 1222.