 Testing. Can you hear me? Yes. Thanks. Good morning, Lonnie. Can you hear me? Yes. Thank you, Manai. Zoning Administrator Nicholson. Can you test your audio and video for me, please? Hi, Lonnie. Can you hear me? Yes. You're good to go. Great. Thank you. Good morning. I'm in a call to order. This April 7th. Meeting of the city's zoning administrator. I'm in a call to order. I'm in a call to order. I'm in a call to order. Which is scheduled to begin at or after 1030 today. My name is Amy Nicholson and I'm the city's zoning administrator. Pursuant to government code section. 54953. And the recommendation of the health officer of the county of Sonoma. We will be conducting this zoning administrator meeting by zoom webinar. And this meeting will be on the website. And this meeting will be at. www.zoom.us. Join or by toll free telephone. 8778. Five three. Five two. Five seven. And this meeting ID. Is eight six two. Four one. Eight nine. Six three ninth. And this meeting will also be live streamed at. YouTube. Com. Flash city of Santa Rosa. Today's meeting is a regular session meeting. The zoning administrator typically holds two meetings per month on the first and third Thursday of each month. This is the first regular session. Zoning administrator meeting of this month. And our next zoning administrator meeting will be held on April 21st. Let's move on to. Agenda item number two, which is general public comment. This is a time when any person may address matters, not listed on this agenda, but are within the subject matter of the jurisdiction. The public may comment on agenda items when the item is called. So each speaker would be allowed three minutes. If there are any general public comments. At this time, if you wish to make a public comment, you could do so by raising your hand. And the raising hand icon is at the bottom of your zoom screen. The zoning administrator Nicholson and doesn't look like there are any hands raised. Okay. Thank you so much. Let's move on to item three. This is zoning administrator business. The zoning administrator is appointed by the planning and economic development department director and has the responsibility and authority to conduct public meetings. And to take action on applications. For all administrative permits and approvals issued by the zoning administrator, I would like to make a public comment. A determination or decision by the zoning administrator may be appealed. And I have no zoning administrator reports today. So we'll go ahead and move on to. Agenda item four, which includes our scheduled items. We do have three meeting items today. So for each item, the project planner will provide a staff presentation. And then we'll move on to item three. Following these presentations, I may ask clarifying questions of the project planner or applicant. I will then open the meeting for public comment on the item under review. Members of the public are invited to provide comments about the project. Which should be limited to three minutes. After public comment concludes, I may ask additional questions of staff with the applicant. I will now move on to item three. And then we'll move on to item four. A determination to approve, deny or continue the project for further review. Today's decision by the zoning administrator are appealable to the planning commission design review board or cultural heritage board. Depending on what the planning approval is. Any appeal must be submitted in writing and filed with the planning. Division on the city application form within 10 days. which for this meeting would be the close of business on April 18th. So let's go ahead and move to our first item. This is item 4.1, a minor youth permit for the Hernandez fence located at 2335 Copperfield. The project planner is Connor McKay. Thank you, Zoning Administrator Nicholson. I will share my screen now. Sweet, can you see my screen? Yes. Thank you. Yeah, so my name is Connor McKay, a city planner and I'm happy to be here this morning to present the minor conditional youth permit requests for the Hernandez Fence Projects located at 2335 Copperfield Drive. This is a minor conditional youth permit request that would allow the construction of front yard fencing with six feet of solid fencing and two feet of lattice located five feet from the back of sidewalk where a 15 foot front setback would otherwise be required. Here is an aerial of the project site. The director determined that the front setback is on the Copperfield Drive side. So the 15 foot front setback abuts the Copperfield Drive public right of way. Here we have a site plan of the proposed fencing. The site plan observes all vision triangle standards and the fence would be located five feet from the sidewalk which allows to maintain the pedestrian experience as pedestrians are walking on that sidewalk. The fence material would also be similar to what already exists as the fence which is outlined in red on the site plan and is also similar in architectural detail to fences that are in the surrounding area. So overall the proposed fencing material is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. We have not received any public comments regarding this item and the project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act or CEQA and satisfies the provisions of CEQA in that the construction of a fence qualifies for a class 32 exemption under section 15303 in that the fence is a residential accessory structure. The Planning and Economic Development Department recommends that the zoning administrator by resolution approve this minor conditional use permit request for the property located at 2335 Copperfield, file number CUP 21-010. And the applicant is not available but I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. Thank you. I do have one clarifying question. Would you mind going back to the, great. So I understand that the red line depicts the existing fence and the green is the proposed fence. There is a driveway or a private drive. So it looks like they've considered visibility and the fence. I realize I'm not looking at the green fence that's further from Copperfield Drive, just the one. Yeah, thanks for that. So yeah, I should have mentioned. So this proposed fence on the western side of the property is would be six feet of solid fence with two feet of lattice and that would be located in the side and rear setbacks which is allowed by right, assuming that a building permit would be required for that fence. Okay. And so there would not be any issues with visibility for the fence proposed along Copperfield Drive. That's correct. Okay. Okay, so the applicant is not here. Thank you for that clarification. I'd like to open a public comment on this item. As a reminder to some of you who are just joining us, if you wish to make a public comment, please press the raised hand icon at the bottom of your Zoom screen. And it looks like we do have somebody raising their hand, a Brian Gebhart. May I speak? Yeah. I would like to point out two deficiencies in the process of application. The first is that the city of Santa Rosa did not notify the Copperfield Homeowners Association. And of this project. Thus, they did not determine whether the Homeowners Association had approved this project. Second is the homeowner did not apply to the Copperfield HOA for permission to make any architectural changes to their property. And that is required by the community, covenants and restrictions. I'm finished. Thank you for your comments. Are there any additional members of the public that would like to provide public comment on this item? Donate administrator Nicholson, I don't see any other hands raised. Okay, thank you. Okay, with that, we will conclude public comment for this item. And Mr. McKay, did you have a response? Yeah. Anything you'd like to provide? Yeah, so thank you for your comment, Mr. Gebhart. I do appreciate that. So this, the city permitting process does not involve itself with HOA approvals. This would just be providing the permit to build the fence from the city's perspective. And then any future approval provided by the HOA would be out of the city's jurisdictional authority. So I believe that once, if this permit was approved, there would be a subsequent review process that would be administered by the homeowners association that the city would not be involved with. And the project has also been noticed in compliance with all noticing requirements. There was a notice sent out to all homeowners and occupants within 600 feet of the project site. And that was provided at least 10 days prior to this meeting. Thank you for that response. And I want to reiterate that it is not the city's practice to be enforcing the regulations of homeowners association. As Mr. McKay mentioned, we respect that and would want the applicant to be working with the homeowners association to obtain the necessary approvals prior to constructing the fence. However, that is not required in order for the city to approve this permit. And did you have something else? Yeah, sorry, I didn't mean to catch you off. I just wanted to add that I do know the applicant has communicated with me that they intend on going through the HOA approval process once the permit is approved. Okay, that's great to hear. It looks like Mr. Givhart is raising his hand again. If you have a follow-up, you can go ahead and provide that. Yes, is it policy for the city not to notify homeowners associations? It is the policy of the city to notify occupants and homeowners within 600 feet of the project site. There aren't any special noticing requirements in the zoning code that Dick Tay providing notice specifically to homeowners associations in which properties are located. Well, I'm gonna conclude and I want you to be on record that this individual said that they would continue their application process with the homeowners association. Is that correct? They did provide that indication that they have the intention of going through the formal HOA review process. Okay, I'm gonna end my conversation. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Givhart. Appreciate it. Yes, thank you for your comments. Okay, I'm looking through the resolution here which is recommending or which includes findings to approve the minor youth permit for the fence. I did actually go out to the site and I observed the existing fences on the property in addition to the fences that are located throughout the neighborhood. So I appreciate the findings that are included in this resolution. I did just quickly, Mr. McKay, I have a question. If you could just describe a little bit more about the special circumstances finding for this particular property. I know that it's somewhat unique in that there's a private drive and just the way the house is oriented but do you have any additional information to provide? Yeah, for sure. So the orientation of the parcel and the as-built structure reduce this applicant's ability to reasonably enjoy their private open space. They have a great deal of open space but that is occupied by trees and the Southern project area is part of their property but they have not been able to enjoy that privately. So this request would increase this resident's ability to reasonably enjoy their private open space which is a luxury afforded to similar neighbors and other community members in this area. Okay, thank you for that. And just giving the resolution one last look. I agree with the CEQA exemption that's been identified and there are no conditions from engineering development services. That's correct. Okay, so I can make all the findings to approve this fence. I appreciate that the construction will be of solid wood and would be in keeping with the existing fences on the property and also several that I identified in the neighborhood. I think that the five foot setback from the sidewalk is enough to keep the fence from overwhelming a pedestrian and I will be approving this project. So I will sign the resolution. I don't see the need for any changes to the resolution but Mr. McKay, I would appreciate if you can follow up with the applicant about Mr. Gebhardt's comments and the need for him to continue to work with the HOA or go through that formal process prior to commencing construction. Understood, we'll do, thank you. Great, thank you. So that concludes item 4.1. Let's move on to item 4.2. This is a hillside development permit for a new pool and patio located at 2280 Newgate Court and our project planner is Monet Shea-Colley. Thank you and good morning, Ms. Nicholson. I'm going to present the project. You already introduced, this is the minor hillside permit for 2280 Newgate Court. So the applicant is proposing to construct a new swimming pool, patio and retaining walls on areas that have slopes greater than 10%. Here is the site that is located in a rebuild area. The house was destroyed by the top fire in 2017 and the applicant has submitted a building permit to construct the house. And because there's an addition, which includes this patio and pool, the applicant has to get first this hillside permit and then move forward the building permit. So here is the house prior to the 2017 fire. As you can see, the house on this side has some patio, concrete patio area and there are some landscape around the house. And here is the zone, which is rural residential and within the RC zoning district, the general plan line is very low density residential. And I wanted to show you here one more thing that this house has access from the private back road. So it's not right at adjacent to like a main city roads. And there is no access from the side because there's a gate at this location. So the only access is from the court. Okay, here. And here shows the slope analysis. The house itself is going to be placed on an area that has slope less than 10%. The new addition for retaining walls and part of the pool are going to be placed on areas that have slopes greater than 10%. The majority of the pool will be placed on the slopes between 10 to 25%, which is shown with yellow. And retaining walls will be placed on areas with more than 25%. The height of those retaining walls is approximately between 30 inches to 36 inch. The applicant is here available and he can go into the detail of height of those retaining walls because it changes and steps them. Also, I want to mention that the pool is going to be placed behind the house and those also retaining walls, they will be down the hill on the slope. So they won't be readily visible from any street. Here is a site plan that they can also propose into plan new trees around the house for additional screening. And again, as you can see, I wanna explain here that this pool will be down the hill and behind the house. And it won't be visible from a public street or it would not interrupt the view of the skyline. And these are the sections of the proposed pool with retaining walls here. I believe it says race pool wall is going to be 30 inch above the existing grid. So that's the height of the retaining wall for this portion of the pool. And there are some other retaining walls that will be up to 36 inches. And next slide. Okay, I have not received any public comments regarding the proposed project. And this project has been reviewed and complies with the California Environmental Quality Act and qualifies for a class III exemption under section 1503, in that the project consists of construction of accessory structures. And with that, the Planning and Economic Development Department recommends that the Zoning Administrator and By Resolution approve this minor hillside development permit for the property located at 2280 Newgate Court. And I know the applicant name is Amini Buggala and he is available today to answer if you have any additional questions. And that was my presentation. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Shekali. Does the applicant, just to clarify, I wanna provide an opportunity if the applicant wants to make any comments. Go ahead and raise your hand. Otherwise, I may have a question. Okay, great. Thank you. Yeah, I don't have any particular comments but happy to answer any questions that you might have. Great. Ms. Shekali, can you pull up the slope analysis, please? Okay. So just for a little bit of clarification where this hillside development permit is specific to the patio, the retaining walls and the pool, the house has received, is the house already, it's been reconstructed? Yeah, it's been reconstructed and we're scheduled for inspection for temporary certificate of occupancy Tuesday next week, the 12th. Great. Thank you. I'm gonna go ahead and pull up the resolution. Bear with me just a moment. I don't believe I have any other questions at this time. So we'll go ahead and move into public comments. So we're opening public comment for this item. If anyone wishes to make a comment, please go ahead and raise your hand or press star nine if you're calling in by phone. Zoning administrator Nicholson, I don't see any hands raised at this time. Okay, thank you. I don't, I'm just ensuring I don't have any additional questions. I think this is pretty straightforward. The plans, I appreciate the submittal. It's easy to understand what's being proposed. I agree with Michikali's finding related to minimizing the alteration of topography. I realized that the site is sloped, but this is focused really on the flattest parts of the site, which makes sense. And I don't see any concern with the development obstructing any views in the area, especially because the site slopes up, which would really screen the pool area. And I appreciate that there will be some landscaping included as well. Sorry, zoning administrator Nicholson. Yes. Can I ask you, are you closing public comment? Oh, yes, I'm sorry. I forgot to do that. Public comment is closed. Thank you. See here. And I see that there are engineering development services conditions of approval that are included as an attachment to this resolution. And I agree with the seek finding again that it's an accessory structure. So I feel comfortable making each of these findings and well be approving the health side development permit. And so that concludes item 4.2. Thank you for attending. And thank you, Michikali, for your presentation. Okay, so next up we have meeting item 4.3. This is design review for the Hyatt Regency and I'm a wine country fence and lighting. This project site is located at 170 Railroad Street and our project planner is Monesha Kali. Thank you, Ms. Nicholson again. So I'm going to present this project. So the proposed fence, as you mentioned, is for 170 Railroad Street. And let me go to the next bit. She's includes landscaping and lighting plans also. So the money design review to construct a new eight foot metal picket fence with associated lighting and landscape along the southern boundary of the property adjacent to the Prince Memorial Greenway. The reason is to increase safety for the existing hotel. Here is where the project is located. And here is the project site along Prince Memorial Greenway. And here I have two, I'm showing two different lines. One is red and one is blue. I want to explain the reason. So first when the applicant came, they had, the applicant had proposed the fence at the location of the red line. When the project went to the waterways at Wiserie, there were some comments to move the fence further back and closer where the pool fence and other structures are. So the applicant pushed the fence back so the new location is being shown as a blue dashed line. So that is where the fence is going to be located. These are some pictures of the existing along the Prince Memorial Way. So there are some arbors there. There's an amphitheater. And there are some great ones that the applicant is proposing to remove them. And here are additional pictures from this site on the site. So there are some fence already around the pool that the applicant will remove and replace that with the new eight foot fence. And here are the two type of fence that our applicant is proposing. One of them is a typical black picket fence. And there is a fence that is going to be placed along the long event place that will have decorative planners to come down the decorative panels to compliment the architect and provide attractive backdrop for outdoor event center and gathering and also for additional security and privacy. So I will explain where is the location for each fence. Here is the proposed site plan. There are, there is a tree gates that will be proposed on the site. And let me show here with this green line. So the green line is the location for the fence that will have a decorative panels and the rest of the fence will be simple picket fence and all the fence will be eight feet. There is an easement that is owned by the city and that easement is along the existing gathering place. And it been shown by the dash line here. It's this area. I hope you can see it. That is owned. That's the easement of the city and city has to maintain that area. There were some questions during the Waterways Adversary Committee that who has to maintain this area and staff reach out to park department and parks it. This is the area that city has to maintain but the area above it it's all the duty of the property owner to maintain it. And here is the fence area again along the existing pool and the yellow line shows the proposed fence that will have decorative panels. There's a gate here and there are lights that will be along the fence shown here and landscaping will be provided also. And here also is the fence that will have the green line shows the fence with decorative panels and the rest of it will be simple picket fence. Here is an example of how the fence would look like. The person is holding the fence is not the exact fence here but the sample of how the eight foot fence would look like with new landscaping. Some of the comments during Waterways Adversary Committee were that provide native plants and the applicant has revised the landscape plans to provide native plants and shorter plants. So they won't go completely screen or cover the fence. So they would keep and maintain their eyes on the creek. And the proposed fence will be placed 50 feet outside of the required setbacks. And just a brief history. The project was presented to Waterways Adversary Committee on January 27th and there were some comments and questions regarding the proposed project and that, oh, I'm sorry, I have a resolution here. I just wanna go over some of the comment from Waterways Adversary Committee. There are concerns regarding the ownership and public access to the art pieces on the site. Staff reach out to the art department. I'm sorry, art department. And I've been told that those art pieces are privately owned and they are on the hotel property but anyone who wants to see those art pieces they can go inside of the hotel and request to see those art pieces but they are not owned by the city. And as I mentioned, there were some concerns with the non-native invasive plants near the creek and the applicant has revised them to provide native plants. There was a question about the color if the applicant can change the color of the fence to the green. And there were some concerns about height of the fence. Six foot fence is preferred over eight foot fence, and then also there were a recommendation that this project needs to go to a design review board. However, the director has reviewed the project and it has been mentioned that the project can go to the Zoning Administrator for decision. And after the first meeting, the applicant submitted revised plans. So I took the project again to Waterways Adversary Committee on February 24th. And that's where the applicant showed the fence is moved back and almost placed at the same location as the pool. I have to mention that there is a wall, existing wall there that's up to 10 feet. And also there are arbors that it's, they are more than eight feet. And some of them can be up to 10 feet. So the fence will be eight feet to provide the safety and security for the property. There were comments and requests to lower it down to six feet, but the applicant wants to keep the eight foot fence for this project. And as of today, I have not received any comments for today's meeting and no public comments for today's meeting. And I think I missed the, I have missed the SICO finding on this PowerPoint, but I will mention what the SICO finding is. So the project has been reviewed and complied as with the California Environmental Quality Act and it qualifies for a class three exemption under section 15303 in that the proposed fence and lighting consists of accessory structures. With that, the Planning and Economic Development Department recommends that the Zonic Administrator by resolution approve the minor design review for the project located at 170 Railroad Street and the file number is DR21-067. I know the Landscape Architect page is also available to answer questions if you have any. And that was my presentation. Thank you. Thank you so much. Ms. Sheikali, I do not believe I have a question right now. Thank you for clarifying the location of the fence with the panels. That was helpful to see on that slide and I might want to talk through that a bit more after we go through public comment just to fully understand the project. But I realize I have one question. So you described the comments received from the Waterways Advisory Committee and I understand that the applicant did revise plans following both of those meetings. I guess at the last meeting, so once the fence location was revised to be closer to the hotel, was the Waterways Advisory Committee supportive of that location but still felt that six feet would be preferable? If I remember correct, it was more supported than the previous design but correct the six foot was preferred over eight foot fence. Okay. And then the Waterways Advisory Committee felt that the changes to the landscape plan in particular the species selected would be appropriate for this area along the creek. There were comments that the natives are preferred and appropriate and also make sure that the plants are maintained in a shorter level so they won't grow and cover defenses because the applicant had proposed plans such as Lady Rose Banks that they will cover the fence and like a wines and it was requested to not propose plans that would cover the fence because we want to maintain the eye and the creek concept. And I just also have to mention that with the previous fence design, a tree was going to be removed but after the project was changed, no tree is going to be removed from that site. So all the trees will be remained there. However, the only parts of the landscaping that would be removed is the wine area and I see Paige, the applicant raised her hand but if you have any questions she can also go over the questions with you. Okay, great, thank you so much. Good morning, Nicholson. Zoning Administrator Nicholson and Monet, thank you for your presentation. I wanted to just clarify one thing or actually two things and I can also make more comments if there's time or if you'd rather me just wait and answer questions, I can do so as well. Two things, one was that one of the biggest plants of concern from the Waterways Committee was a pyrocantha, which was placed along the fence line and the pyrocantha has little red berries and that was the biggest concern from many of the members and so that plant has been completely replaced with a native plant, Carpentaria. So I just wanted to mention that as well just because of the berries. And then the second thing was the request from a couple of the members to make the fence green and in the design guidelines for the fence, it clearly states that the fence can either be black or green and we have specified it as black and that's because it's a manufactured product that comes in a black color and in order for it to be green, we would have to paint the whole new fence that's already coming painted. And we also believe that the black will recede into the landscape in a better way than a green one would. I don't know whether there's time also for me to make more comments, but if you'd like me to answer questions, I can, but I can also give some more information about the project if you'd like. Great, thank you so much and that was helpful information about the plant selection. I also see that we have a condition in the resolution that condition number nine, that relates to maintaining eyes on the creek so that vegetation isn't obstructing the view out to the creek. So I appreciate that that's memorialized in the resolution. The lighting plan, I'm not Monet or Misha colleague, excuse me, I believe that you talked about it in your presentation. I wasn't sure that I fully understood where it's proposed and are there any details on the type of light fixture? So the type of the fixtures page can explain them to you, but let me show you here the location of those lighting. So as you see here are around the tree, here again around the tree and some are here and here around the fence. So they've been shown on the plan, but the type of the fixtures page, can you explain those? But I wanna show you the location, they are being shown that they're along the fence or around the trees. Yes, thank you Monet. The lighting is all low voltage and very discreet. The fixtures that are up in the trees are little bullets that will be up higher and all the fixtures are full cut off, dark skies compliant, low voltage at 2,700 K. So just a really soft light and then the ones that will be on some of the posts for the fence are the same full cut off, just illuminating some of the areas along the fence. And it's just in this one area around the vet event space where the fence goes out into the landscape a little bit more and around the pool, there's no lighting on that fence. It's really just in this central event space area and I think we really only have maybe 10 fixtures on the fence. Most of it's just in the light for accent lighting and just to have a little bit more light for security purposes, but it's soft and discreet. Thank you, that's helpful and has the type of fixture like what it looks like been identified or is it included in the plan? It has been identified and it was, they were outlined in our building permit set, but I don't know that I included them in this minor design review. No, they were not included in this one. Yeah, sorry, Mona, excuse me, but yes, so just the location was shown. Okay. Are they, can you describe just like the material and the color? Sure, yes. So the ones that are up in the trees will be about less than a two inch diameter by five inch length. They'll all be a dark, dark brown, so you don't even see them. And then the fixture on the fence is the same thing. It's, I mean, not the same thing, but in terms of color, it's the same thing. It'll be a dark color and then just a round tube, very clean and simple and we'll just illuminate down. So maybe three inches by four inches on the posts. The posts are all three inch posts, so it won't be bigger than the post. Okay, and how is, so there's light, there are light fixtures to be mounted in the tree or it, sorry. Yeah, so the little bullets that go up in the tree, basically since it's low voltage, the cable comes up the tree trunk to about 10 to 12 feet in height. And then the fixtures are attached to the tree with a bungee cord, which is flexible and will allow the tree to continue to grow. And then those bullets are facing downward, casting light, shining light on the tree trunks and washing the path below. Okay, I do have a question about the panel. So I see that the panels that are proposed to be affixed to that particular length of the fence by the event center. So are those, there are some type of cutout in there or what is, would it be possible to see through them or is it really like there's no way to see? Can you see like? Yes, it's a little bit. Yeah, it's a metal perforated panel, which has cutouts. And it's in a pattern. I don't know, Monet, do you by any chance have that available to show Zoning Administrator Nicholson, the panel that's been selected? The picture that you provided me, right? Yes. Let me see. Oh, I don't have it in the attachment. No, I presented that to Waterways Advisory Committee when you provided it. Yeah, so basically it's using the exact same fence that goes the full length of the project. And then these panels get affixed and they're perforated and they have a cutout pattern that will match the architecture of the building. It's kind of a Spanish style cutout. And the cutouts I would say are about the size of a nickel or a quarter. This pattern that's shown here on the CAD plan is just kind of a generic pattern. It's not the exact pattern that's been selected for the metal fence. There is some transparency to it. The reason that we were putting the decorative panels in this area is because this is the area that really needs the most security due to the proximity to the central gathering space in the Prince Memorial Greenway. And basically in the Prince Memorial Greenway, there is a 36 inch high stone wall that goes around that central gathering space. It's about a half circle. You can see it right there where it says existing wood trellis 10 foot height approximately in the gathering space. There's a stone wall and then there's a wood trellis that sits on top of that. And there's concern about people being able to climb that existing feature in the central gathering space of the Prince Memorial Greenway and climbing over the eight foot fence. So the decorative panels offer another level of security for the hotel all while keeping it attractive and keeping some transparency through from one side to the other. Okay. Thank you. That's a helpful background. And yeah, Ms. Sheikali, if you are able to find the detail if it's in the file somewhere, if you could do a share screen just while we're talking, I'd be curious to see it. I will find it. Just give me a second. Great. Thank you so much. So I think that that includes all of my questions for now. So why don't we move on to a public comment? So I'd like to open the public comment period for this item. If you'd like to make a comment, please use the raise hand feature in Zoom. Zoning administrator, I don't see any hands raised at this time. Thank you. With that, I will go ahead and close public comment for this item. And Ms. Sheikali, whenever you find that plan or that detail, just let me know. And we can- I found it. I'm going to share our screen. Great. Perfect. I found it. It was sent in the email. So this is how the gate would look like, but of course it would be eight feet in height. And this is the panel, how it would look like. This is the design of those panels. I think I'm going to show you the gate. So that is a gate that has that panel. Correct. In that same pattern. Correct. But in this case, it would be painted black. Correct. So it will be this panel. This one. Okay. With this design. Okay. That's good. Yep. Thank you. That's helpful. Let's see here. Is there a condition or is it really clear in the plans where the panelized fences is permitted? Ms. Sheikali, I recall looking at the plans and I don't- Yes, it's not very clear. I was able to find them, but let me show you here. So here it says metal picket fence. This is where it starts work. As you can see here, it explains. You're not sharing your screen. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. So here on this plan, it shows metal picket fence. This is where it starts with the gate. And next slide. And here it shows fence detail that is 1L22. Here it ends and it's again the regular picket fence in this area. So here it shows this metal picket fence along the section. That's the area. Does it help? Let me see if she covers any. Not on this one. Yes. So I guess the zoomed in section of the site plan, it might be page four. It's basically on this page. I see it on this page and this page here. I'm just wondering if perhaps it might help to just have a condition or something that makes it really clear what the, either on the plan, marking it on the plan or I'm just thinking in the future, plan checking just to make sure that it's very clear the segment where the panelized fence is going. So whether, if you think it's clear enough on the plans then that's okay with me. Or if not, that we describe the particular length as in the resolution somewhere so that there's no confusion if someone else is doing the plan check. We can add the condition that says on the building plans, make sure to show the location of the fence with panels, clearly identify the location. That would be great. So if you can add that into the resolution. Thank you so much. And let me I'm reviewing the applicant or applicant representative has received the draft resolution and reviewed the conditions and accepts them. I emailed the draft resolution to Page. Page, have you reviewed it? Your muted page. Yes, it's been reviewed and we see no issues with it. Okay, great, thank you. Okay, so, oh, I did have one last question related to, I saw some language related to phasing the landscape improvements, Ms. Martin, I don't know if you can describe that a little bit more what the intent is there, a potential timeframe. Hi, yes, the intent was to have the fence and the lighting installed right away. And so that's why we were saying that that's phase one because that's our biggest concern, especially getting into event season this summer, we're really wanting to get that installed as soon as possible. And then the planting would follow. Not sure, we would wanna do the planting when appropriate. So probably not in the hottest months of the summer when it's difficult to get plants to establish because of the dryness, but probably this fall. So I would say that phase two, it's also possible if we can get everything approved and going and here quickly, then we could do it all at once, but we really wanted to phase the landscape in so that it was installed at a time where it could be successful. Okay, thank you, that's helpful. So I understand the desire to have a focus and a sense that provides some security. And I really appreciate that it went through Waterways Advisory Committee review twice and that the applicant made some pretty big changes to the plan based on those comments. I do think that the new proposed location will be a lot less impactful to those that are on the Prince Memorial Greenway. And I think it strikes a balance of providing security but also not fully closing off the space by the majority of the fence being the picket style. I think that the landscape improvements will be really nice to see. And I hope that they are, I'm not sure what the plan is in terms of submitting building permits. I understand that we typically would review the landscape plans for water efficiency requirements. And so I'm not sure if you're going to be submitting all those at once and then just planning to install the landscaping in the fall months when it will be more successful. I understand the importance of that. And I just hope to see the landscaping installed sometime in the next year or not too far after the fence and lighting are installed. So I really appreciate that condition that I mentioned earlier about maintaining vegetation along the fence line because eyes on the creek is very, that's really important. It's mentioned in basically all of our policy documents that talk about creek side development. And I appreciate that the fence is far outside of the creek setback as well. And also the inclusion of native plants in that area. So I can make all of the findings that are required. And I will approve the project, the design review entitlement, and Ms. Shekali, I'll look for the resolution or that added condition related to the panelized fence and then can sign a resolution of approval. And thank you, Ms. Martin, for answering my questions and providing some additional information. That was very helpful. So with that, I will conclude item 4.3. And just a reminder that any action or all actions that were taken today are appealable. So you can go ahead and inquire with the project planner if you have any questions about that process. But just a reminder that the deadline for submitting an appeal is April 18th. And with that, I will adjourn today's meeting. Thank you.