[0:04] The four frag city council meets concurrently as the four frag municipal improvement district number one, and the four frag redevelopment successor agency.

[0:14] Let's all please stand for the pledge.

[0:24] All

[0:34] right, thank you so much. Madam Clerk, could you please take roll.

[0:39] Peters.

[0:41] Here.

[0:42] Here.

[0:43] Allen Smith.

[0:44] Brassman.

[0:45] Here.

[0:47] All right.

[0:48] Thank you.

[0:51] We did have a close session.

[0:52] There was no reportable action taken under a gender review.

[0:56] We are pulling item 5H from the consent calendar.

[1:00] So 5H has been pulled from the agenda.

[1:04] Under mayor's recognitions and announcements, we do have one this evening.

[1:07] the introduction of the city's emergency management program volunteers have to know Neil could you

[1:14] take a send of that.

[1:20] So I am joined tonight by Dr Leslie Cron Gold. She was the only volunteer that I get here present.

[1:28] My other three will introduce more formally here in a moment or out of town.

[1:33] I will be brief. I know you have a full agenda tonight. We've actually moved this. I think this is the third time

[1:38] And I thought it was important to get these individuals recognized.

[1:42] So the EMPV program, emergency management program volunteers, where did it come from?

[1:48] It comes right out of your strategic plan, city manager whipping in the city of Fort

[1:52] Brad continue to make disaster preparedness, community resilience, and emergency management

[1:56] a top priority.

[1:58] And one of the things we talked about was how do we make our community more resilience?

[2:01] I can tell you after working with multiple departments in this city, there's not a staff

[2:06] member that's got an extra ounce left right now.

[2:07] their capacity. So we met as a team, myself, Isaac and Chief, trying to figure out how

[2:12] could we create some force multipliers in this. And so we look back to that strategic plan.

[2:17] And we said, well, seven B says volunteerism that we're going to try to get people on our community,

[2:21] the wrongs from glass beach, the bike backs, to clear the roads that are passionate about

[2:25] keeping our communities safe and keeping them fulfilled. And we're going to try to enlist them.

[2:29] And I'll be honest, there was some nice say, as I said, there's no way we're going to get people

[2:32] to come to free volunteer workforce. I will tell you that this program's been going for

[2:37] three months now, and it absolutely has been a force multiplier for me, and getting a emergency management

[2:43] project done. So what it was is we basically went out for applications. We asked the community

[2:50] members to submit what their background was, and then they did a 300 word essay on what program

[2:54] they would like to bring immediately to the city if they thought they could within six months.

[2:59] I was going to be happy if I got one applicant. I got five amazing applicants.

[3:03] And one of the news parts about it is that none of them agree with me.

[3:07] I've already had some disagreements with them, and that's the point of the whole community

[3:10] concepts to make sure that we're hearing from all voices.

[3:13] The program details are all volunteers.

[3:16] They basically, what they do is a research and review plans from other cities,

[3:23] other programs that are already working well.

[3:25] And really, honestly, they're just, and I hate to say, we're a think tank of nerds,

[3:28] where we sit around and we have funds talking about emergency management,

[3:31] where this is where this is going. They have no decision making authority. Outside of our conference

[3:36] in the room and talking and then I bring those ideas back to the emergency director Isaac to make

[3:42] the final decisions. So who are they? So I had five total. You see four listed here. One of them

[3:47] was council member Alvin Smith. Unfortunately, after much review, I think she would have been a great

[3:51] member to join the team. It was hard for her to work for me and we worked for her, created a sick

[3:55] thing. I'm sure she will continue to be involved. Dr. Leslie Crongold, who's next to me,

[4:01] served on the CIRC team in Alameda County, Red Cross in the East Bay, and she currently runs

[4:06] Surfwood Prepared, which is kind of the model project right now for the coasts for communities,

[4:11] so the surfwood community does surfwood prepare, they have meetings, they go over, they learn things

[4:16] together, and they basically pass information. She's also got experience strangely enough with our

[4:21] for management emergency management software BOC, which she used down in Alameda.

[4:27] Teresa Scar, who's not here tonight, I believe she is out visiting her daughter.

[4:31] She's retired from medical device regulatory field, where she assisted with new medical devices

[4:36] came out on the market. She worked to get them into the market, so kind of a mix of all.

[4:40] She assisted with the emergency management program in Metatronics and Santa Rosa, and she

[4:44] is a previous experience of writing emergency plans. Mary Rose Kay, who we're all familiar with,

[4:49] City of Berkeley office of emergency services and cert team. She's a journalist. She serves on various different committees public policy think tanks and conferences right now

[4:58] She's at the United Nation Commission on the status of women in New York so she could not be here.

[5:03] Lori Star who also could not be here because she's working in the emergency room tonight volunteers with the Albion little river fire department

[5:09] Worked on our ambulances and EMT and currently works in emergency room so that's that's our team right now

[5:14] Um, I wanted to bring them before you will quick and with just a couple minutes each, um,

[5:19] probably less than that to go over their initial projects. The EOP executive summary to

[5:23] reasons working on taking that EOP and bringing it down. You're going to see a short video.

[5:27] But for her work on that, Laurie's working on a feasibility study of airing ground and water

[5:31] transportation following emergency. Mary Rose, uh, doing some stuff with tourists, populations.

[5:36] You see some of that in her video. Um, Leslie here is developing an effective median stakeholder plan

[5:41] for marginalized communities,

[5:42] and she's working with me on access and functional needs,

[5:44] which is a requirement.

[5:46] Teresa's already tore up my emergency management website

[5:49] and told me how out of date it was,

[5:50] and she has built a plan on how to fix it

[5:52] or waiting on the new one.

[5:53] And Leslie has logs, podcasts, and media,

[5:56] which is another one of her passions.

[5:57] She's gonna help me with, let's see,

[6:01] we have new volume.

[6:02] It's okay, we don't.

[6:17] I can't remember my two videos.

[6:20] And if not, we'll skip it, because I know you're a virgin, and I want to get bless you a little bit of time.

[6:25] So why we're waiting on that?

[6:27] I'm going to pass this off to Lesley.

[6:28] She's going to talk a little bit about her project.

[6:31] She's working on right now.

[6:33] Thank you.

[6:34] Is that so?

[6:37] Hello.

[6:38] Hello.

[6:39] Well, I have seen that.

[6:41] I became involved in disaster preparedness, how three years ago when I moved down MEDAS,

[6:52] when I first purchased the home and called in the DMV, I was diagnosed with a drug

[6:57] or muscular condition at that time, and it became important for me to figure myself in the

[7:11] So, my neighbor said he'd run into a neighborhood,

[7:16] and I'll find a house that has been down in New Zealand.

[7:20] As a chair of,

[7:23] I'll show you some of the doctors.

[7:26] So, moving up here for years ago,

[7:30] as soon as the situation was deciding the difference

[7:34] in Alabama and the need for it.

[7:40] and community resilience was more important.

[7:46] So, I'm about to engage with the diverse groups of here

[7:50] representing the whole community approach.

[7:54] To understand the necessity of our citizens,

[7:59] our community, and the small ones,

[8:03] they call their meetings with state states,

[8:05] And maybe you're going to say things as well as involving vulnerable citizens like myself

[8:13] who have some kind of ability, talent, and those from the large numbers we have on

[8:22] the coast, as well as people living with product health condition as you need to access requirements.

[8:30] My main role as a volunteer in the program will be creating and not being tested

[8:38] due to media campaigns, and I encourage everything from the following day in the messaging

[8:45] for a social media for some things for YouTube videos and webinars all on the way to

[8:55] I think the posters are really being here posted on the boards all around the town.

[9:03] I think we really have that amount of data.

[9:05] That is not as much as a view of what there is as it is here.

[9:12] But they go along a bit.

[9:13] It's really the power of citizens being so sufficient in those communities and the emerging communities.

[9:22] Thanks.

[9:24] And we'll post the other two videos on social media as part of the media campaigns to come out for this.

[9:29] I want to give a genuine heartfelt thank you to each of you. I've been coming before you for two years.

[9:33] I told you last year that this year we were getting on to the micro part where we were going to start preparing individuals.

[9:38] And it's got to keep having these conversations.

[9:40] Thank you City Manager, Whippy, for allowing us to come up here and for supporting us and doing all this.

[9:45] Thanks so much to both of you for being here to present.

[9:49] Really appreciate it.

[10:01] Okay, then at this time, I would like to invite public comment on non-agenda items, anyone in the room

[10:07] I'd like to speak on a non-agenda item.

[10:12] But, well,

[10:18] welcome.

[10:24] Good evening, Council members, staff, and the public.

[10:29] I'm so pleased to be here once again.

[10:33] My name is Marcie Snyder, and I'm a resident of Fort Brake.

[10:36] And I'm here to talk about our roadside attraction that owns the land out there,

[10:43] that approximately 272 acres is called the Stone Train. It's an old industrial

[10:52] mill site, it's zoned industrial.

[10:58] It's been an industrial mill site for approximately 150 years.

[11:04] The contamination of that site is extensive, there are PCBs, dioxins, petrochemicals,

[11:17] estesters, and more, and various locations, and some of it very extensive

[11:26] on the

[11:35] center out there, or a nursing home, it will not be allowed.

[11:43] The groundwater is also contaminated.

[11:46] It's very contaminated, and the use of the water, of the water, out on that old industrial

[11:53] site, the use of it is prohibited by law, by state law. You cannot use that water. So any water

[12:03] That goes out to that site, will come from, it will be piped in from the city, whatever those plans are, which means that piping will be paid for by the citizens, by the residents, by the visitors who come to our community, is going to be paid for by taxpayer dollars.

[12:29] This is huge. It's one thing that when the development plan was brought forth, or it was not addressed,

[12:37] was the extent of the toxins out there. And people have talked about cleanup. There has been some remediation.

[12:47] It's impossible to clean up all that stuff. It's just plain impossible.

[12:55] So you will be hearing more about this in the future from various people.

[12:59] I'm not the only one.

[13:01] I really hope that you will really think about this.

[13:06] This is an old industrial site, and it's poisoned.

[13:11] It's not suitable for habitation,

[13:14] and it's not suitable for schools.

[13:16] It's not suitable for the elderly to live there long term.

[13:20] So once again, thank you very much.

[13:23] And I hope you have a very productive meeting this evening.

[13:26] And thank you so much to the public.

[13:30] All right. Thank you. Other speakers on non agenda items.

[13:34] Hi, yes, it's Jacob Anderson. I wasn't going to speak on this but I wanted after

[13:38] Marcie's comments to say in general, it's my understanding that it's not the

[13:42] taxpayers who would pay for the infrastructure but the developers of the land.

[13:46] Generally, that's how it works. If you want to put new development and new

[13:50] streets in water, lines, new streets, lights and things that whoever

[13:54] owns the land in a stranger development pays for it rather than the general community.

[13:59] Just because I just want to make sure people are working on unbiased and accurate information.

[14:07] However, I've been used to being a stunk train advocate or whatever and I'm not, I don't speak for them in any way.

[14:15] I'm just wanted to make sure that people are working off of accurate information rather than what some people assume is the case.

[14:21] Thank you.

[14:23] All right, thank you.

[14:24] Anyone else in the room, what to speak on on a gender?

[14:28] All right, Madam Court, can I one on one?

[14:38] Please use the raise hand feature for public comment on non-agenda items.

[14:50] Good evening. My name is Henry Weibo. I understand with a lot of staff and changes at CIT-

[15:00] The hall, some things aren't working as smoothly as they could. I am concerned that a lot of people

[15:12] who in the past subscribe to getting invitations to city council meetings and planning

[15:20] commission meetings and people who've signed up for all kinds of other subjects of their

[15:27] interest are not being informed, unless they sign up again. Somehow a glitch happens, this

[15:34] is the third time now that I have to sign up again, and this is, I've been sign up for

[15:41] most of the issues I'm interested in since around 2015. So if you can make that clear

[15:50] to the public that they need to sign up again if they are not receiving any information.

[15:56] Also, for one of the items for tonight, it was brought to the attention to you, it's a consent calendar item by Jacob Patterson, that what is labeled this in the staff report as a gender item number 6A is actually 7B.

[16:21] Also,

[16:31] it would be nice for the public to know by when they should submit comments so they

[16:41] posted online for an item if they submitted let's say on a Friday before 5 and they want

[16:52] to know when it will be posted I understand it for tonight's meeting it got posted around

[16:59] to a clock that it's good to know for the public when this is posted also it wouldn't be nice to

[17:08] have invitations and be able to make comments and already have the agenda earlier on.

[17:17] I think I only read the agenda for tonight's meeting by Friday.

[17:24] That doesn't give the public a lot of time to get ready.

[17:27] So, it would be nice for the public to be kept abreast of how the city deals with things and I know with staff changes it's been a little rocky in the past.

[17:44] Thanks for accepting my input.

[17:49] Thank you, other comments online.

[17:51] I'm Lana Genda.

[17:58] Andrew Jordan, you have three minutes.

[18:02] Can you hear me?

[18:04] Yes. Great. Yeah, there's no time or up and there wasn't for endary either. I have basically

[18:12] three things I'd like to mention. First of all, I've been enjoying the weather by walking

[18:16] out in about the city, which is one of the great pleasures of living here. And I've noticed

[18:21] that the sidewalks are being maintained very well with regards to finding changes in elevation

[18:29] or tow gravers that are being ground down and I'm now seeing the grinding marks on the sidewalks

[18:34] and so I really appreciate public maintenance handling that. I think it really adds to

[18:41] the city and prevents injury, which is nice not to have the lawsuits accompanying that.

[18:48] The second thing I have, a three, is basically several times at least twice,

[18:55] But a more occasion that I've occurred in the past, basically with trash cans, down in the business district, get full on the weekends.

[19:07] And they're not being emptied, and if tourism and attracting visitors to the town is important, I think that those should be checked and monitored so that it isn't the detraction from the pleasant appearance of the city.

[19:22] and third on Facebook, and I filled out a survey on this, basically whether or not

[19:30] an ocular she'd go on the coastal trail, and I think that's a great idea, but I just

[19:33] think it's going to end up like the bike repair station at the older street bathrooms there

[19:38] by the mill pond. I think it's going to be destroyed and vandalized in pretty short order.

[19:43] But the real advantage, having something like that is, first of all, of course, when the whales

[19:47] go by and seeing the spouts off the coast, it's really a treat, and today I saw something very

[19:54] unique because kind of down by, I forget the rock that sticks out, but it's kind of over

[20:01] by the water treatment plant and the crows nest over there of the neocenter.

[20:06] Instead of being on the table rock out there, the sea lions were just floating in the water,

[20:11] kind of in a raft and barking, and then some of them were just playing in the waves.

[20:15] Having some sort of binoculars to see that, so that people could look at it up close,

[20:19] would really be, I think, an asset and would really complement the coastal trail, and I think

[20:26] the City Council very much for listening and fielding landmarks. Thank you.

[20:33] Thank you.

[20:40] Jamie Martin, you have three minutes.

[20:43] Thank you, good evening. Council members and staff.

[20:46] I just wanted to update you on 575 South Whipple Street.

[20:50] I have seen some pictures of the modular for James Lindsay that's been placed there.

[20:58] We're in contact every week, and he's just waiting, I believe, for the city water and sewer hookups, and then they've got a fixie and tree way.

[21:07] And do some more work, but the modular has been placed, and he is looking forward to being able to move back in there with his stepdad.

[21:14] He just had a birthday this last weekend.

[21:18] I just, he's concerned he's not going to be able to afford it because of all the time that

[21:25] it's taken to have the receivership followed through with his promise of getting the modular

[21:33] ready for him.

[21:34] So, but if you drive by, you'll see it.

[21:35] It looks nice.

[21:36] I saw some pictures of the inside that were taken by his good friend, Dr. Saps, and James's

[21:43] is not allowed on the property yet, but he is anxious to get back there and he's gonna need some

[21:49] things to furnish it. That's for sure because a lot of his things were left behind and removed

[21:54] when the house was demolished. So I just wanted to update you and let you know that it's in the

[22:02] But it's going to be up to the city that's figure out her and him and the receiver how he can actually take possession of it again.

[22:15] So, because it's going to increase his cost a lot. His property tax are going to go up because of the improvements.

[22:20] He already had water and sewer there and he's got to have that reestablished.

[22:27] Anyway, so thank you.

[22:30] Okay, thank you for the comments.

[22:33] Who hands?

[22:36] Then I would invite any public comments on the consent calendar.

[22:42] I get Jason, it's Jacob Patterson again.

[22:44] You said you hold five H from the agenda.

[22:48] I assume in part because of my written public comment about it.

[22:52] But I'm not quite sure why.

[22:54] They're pretty easy fixes.

[22:55] In my eyes as I mean guys, they're just pull it for discussion.

[22:58] to make some amendments, which is still my recommendation still something you guys can do. Thanks.

[23:04] All right. Thank you. Any other comments on the concept, Calder?

[23:09] All right.

[23:09] But online, but new hands. Okay. All right. We already took close session comments.

[23:17] And that would take us to staff comments. That's really. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[23:22] I just wanted to announce to the public and the council that Cal Fire and the state fire

[23:28] Marshall did release the City of Fort Brakes Fire has a severity zone.

[23:34] This is available on the city's website, so city.fortbrake.com.

[23:41] As required by government code, we must adopt an ordinance designated areas within our jurisdiction

[23:47] as either moderate or very high fire hazard within 120 days of receiving the state fires

[23:56] Marshall's recommendation so just wanted to mention that we are invite in public comment

[24:02] the public comment period will be closing on April 25th so again the maps are available on the

[24:10] city's website for public comment. Secondly we do have the business roundtable which is going to be

[24:19] at City Hall or tunnel on the second of April. So this come in Wednesday, a business from

[24:27] table here at tunnel. And that's it for staff comments, Mr. Mayor. Okay, thanks so much.

[24:35] That will take us to matters from council members. How's my repeaters?

[24:40] I'll keep it short. The fire protection authority does me tomorrow evening. If anyone's interested

[24:45] at the Firehouse right next door there we meet at I have a clock.

[24:52] I met with Jill Rex Road at the Fort Bragg Senior Center last week.

[24:56] I was concerned like many of you may be concerned about the senior center losing funding

[25:01] from the federal government that allowed them to continue with their lunches, their popular

[25:06] senior lunches.

[25:08] For a lot of the seniors in our community, that's their only social activity.

[25:13] They really look forward to it and seeing others.

[25:17] But I was told that the, I forget the exact name of the federal act,

[25:23] American, older Americans act or anyway the funding will be continued for now.

[25:29] Things look okay, the lunches are still on.

[25:32] There was a social media rumor that the lunches had discontinued on March 14th.

[25:36] They have not discontinued. They are serving lunches up there for seniors.

[25:41] and it's a great program. I was just concerned there are several other agencies that help

[25:49] the poor and needy and elderly in our community that rely on federal funding that have been

[25:54] threatened. We're all communities, I think, really need to look out for themselves in this

[25:59] situation right now and at least according to our director, Joe retro at our senior center seems to

[26:05] okay, they certainly are always going to look for more funding.

[26:10] The funding is good for now, but how long it's going to be secure for.

[26:14] We don't know.

[26:15] It's such a valuable asset to Fort Bragg, our senior center.

[26:19] We really must rally together if, in fact, federal funding gets cut in any way shape or form.

[26:24] So things seem to be okay right now.

[26:27] Just seem to feel okay about the situation, which is extremely concerned about the future.

[26:32] Maybe not the immediate future, but the future, which seems to get here

[26:35] quicker than we realize sometimes. So at least feel secure for now that our senior centers and good hands and the funding is okay and secure and that our lunches will continue.

[26:45] But let's keep our eye on that on the senior center. Make sure that they continue to be viable source for our community. So that's all I have.

[26:53] Thank you so much. Council member.

[26:55] Okay. Council member. All right.

[27:00] He has no comments.

[27:02] Oh, I see.

[27:04] Yeah.

[27:04] We had a well run.

[27:05] We can before last.

[27:08] And you may have noticed something like 600 runners, plus walking around with their

[27:13] Bibs and their sweaty clothes.

[27:16] That was a really exciting event.

[27:18] We also had downtown.

[27:19] We had the well festival, which had charter tasting and rotary had a beer tasting.

[27:27] I think there was a wide walk, there were whale viewing on the headlands and whale interpretation

[27:35] and did they actually do a campfire? I'm not sure. Now they talked about a campfire but

[27:41] anyway it was an exciting event next year's will be on the second weekend but it's still

[27:46] the middle of March and the way the calendar works. So that was really exciting.

[27:53] I've shown Smith here, Ram, a half marathon, and I'm sure a lot of you are pretty excited.

[28:00] Oh, I know, talk to him back there, you ran, and several of you in the audience probably did to you.

[28:09] Just let you know that MTA is having their meeting at Thursday at 1.30. If you have a combat or you need more buses

[28:20] or have a, would like to, what they call, and that needs, you can come in person to the office

[28:28] at Elm Street down the way there, 130, and you'll be on first. And then so I have.

[28:36] All right, thanks so much, Vice Mayor.

[28:41] I just recently went on a tour with Chris Hart behind the Melcetta a little bit. I went and

[28:48] in the garage where they work on the trains, where they're building a rail train bathroom

[28:58] first of this kind. I've seen the dry shed where I know they store supplies for various

[29:12] businesses in town and I've seen the daylight where the carnivals held. I just seen a different view

[29:23] of the coastal trail, also of the bed grass and very briars. I'm going to see where PG&E is

[29:35] older staging when they're out there. So it was very eye-opening out there and also I learned

[29:42] that Mendocino Railway and you've a city. I remember as a kid and even now you don't want

[29:50] get stuck at the railroad crossing, because there's a train with 40, 50, I...

[30:00] So we can always count boxcars going by. So that's Chris Hart and minutes, you know, Rayway, I didn't know that. So that was it. Thank you.

[30:11] All right, thank you. I myself, I wanted to acknowledge the recent transfer of $100,000 from the

[30:18] and a, you know, Coast Recreation and Park District to the C.V. Star.

[30:22] This generous gift comes from Jack B. Thomas and Mary W. Thomas, who contributed $100,000

[30:28] to the Thomas Trust, established in 1992. At that time, the Thomases were well aware of

[30:34] the district's goal of building the Star Center. Mr. Thomas was a regular swimmer at the

[30:39] Old Recreation Gym pool and remained an active member of the Star Center until his passing

[30:43] in 2019. We want to thank the district for their continued commitment to honoring the

[30:48] legacy of community members like the Thomas's and for their dedication to the Star Center's

[30:53] mission.

[30:54] And I highly fell asleep, did you want to say a couple words?

[30:57] Yeah, come on up.

[30:59] Thank you, Mayor.

[31:01] I'm here to read a statement from our chair, Mr. Dave Schbock, who's very sorry he couldn't

[31:05] be here.

[31:07] And I'm Kylie Felicit with MCRPD, I'm the General Manager.

[31:12] The transfer of $100,000 from the District's Aquatics Reserve Fund to the city is a note

[31:17] the milestone in several respects. One, the district has successfully carried out a steadfast

[31:24] commitment to honoring the intent of the generous Thomas revocable living trust donation

[31:30] by protecting the funds in a dedicated reserve account and by ensuring the city will place

[31:36] the entire amount in an account earmarked exclusively for the CB Star Aquatic Center.

[31:42] 2. The district in the city have successfully completed the full transfer of ownership, management, and operation of the aquatic center to the city.

[31:54] 3. The district in the city are harnessing their complementary strengths and supportive cooperation to build a robust partnership for delivering valuable accessible and affordable recreational services to city residents and visitors.

[32:11] Dave says he appreciates the City Council's dedication to community service and he is

[32:16] grateful to the City Manager for his constant support of leadership toward continuing success

[32:22] for the CB Star Aquatic Center and on behalf of MCRPD, thank you to the City.

[32:29] All right. Thank you. Okay, so that will take us to the consent calendar. Remember, we've pulled

[32:38] five H, or there are any other items with questions or concerns.

[32:46] If there are none, I'll go ahead and make a motion.

[32:49] We accept the consent calendar as amended, removing item five H for further discussion.

[32:55] Second,

[32:59] we have a first by Council Member Peter, second by the vice mayor.

[33:06] Peters?

[33:08] Pocket?

[33:09] Yes.

[33:10] Oppencent?

[33:10] Yes.

[33:13] Yes.

[33:14] Yes.

[33:15] And just to clarify, we're putting that item off until another meeting.

[33:21] Right.

[33:33] That takes us to item number six, disclosure of expert take communications on agenda items.

[33:39] Colleagues, any expert take communications you'd like to disclose.

[33:44] No, I just went out yesterday and walked the proposed site that we're going to talk about here.

[33:50] But I didn't talk to anybody out there.

[33:53] I did watch also the planning commission meeting on this item.

[33:57] Just sort of a way to know, so I heard all the testimony on all the most planning

[34:02] commissioners and the public's comments at that particular meeting.

[34:06] I did watch that, so they did, I think, to schools both of those.

[34:11] Thanks so much.

[34:12] Thanks for acknowledging anybody else.

[34:14] I also watched some of the planning commission meeting, not all of it.

[34:18] So, and aware, that's some stuff also.

[34:27] All right, I will also acknowledge I saw some of the planning

[34:30] commissions meeting online reporting.

[34:35] All right, then, that will take us to our public hearing,

[34:39] our first public hearing item seven A.

[34:42] Receive a report, hold a public hearing, receive planning commissions

[34:45] recommendation regarding coastal development permits

[34:48] CDP-24 designer view, DR-11-24, use permit, UP-9-24, and sign permit, SP-20-24, for a multi-family project,

[35:03] at 1151 South Main Street.

[35:07] Jason, I introduce myself.

[35:09] I have a conflict with the property.

[35:12] That's okay.

[35:13] In the area.

[35:13] Okay.

[35:15] Thanks for letting us know.

[35:18] So, for the record, Council Member Hawking indicated he has some real property interest nearby,

[35:25] which is orange, we're accusing himself.

[35:28] All right, that.

[35:30] With that, can I just make a comment, too, just for the public, for Percedor's standpoint,

[35:36] now there's four of us left.

[35:38] So if there's a two-two vote on something that comes before us, when there's four council members,

[35:42] that, in effect, is a no.

[35:45] So, for anything to pass or for a yes vote, it's going to take three of us to vote, yes,

[35:50] and we're correct in that parent.

[35:51] But it's correct.

[35:52] Thank you.

[35:53] All right. Thanks for that clarification. Appreciate it.

[35:56] All right, Ms. Jones.

[35:59] Good evening, Council members.

[36:01] I'm going to depart from my typical long drawn out reading of a staff report because you were given this staff report in plenty of time.

[36:11] and it's a lot to cover and I found that at the planning commission meeting it took almost an hour.

[36:18] And I think there's a lot of people in the audience who want to speak and you probably don't need to hear me that much.

[36:23] So instead I have prepared a little PowerPoint and I hope that will make it shorter and sweeter.

[36:30] So I wanted to start off by just providing some context for this entitlement discussion.

[36:36] And that is that there are really two pieces of law that have a huge influence on your deliberations night and the review of this project.

[36:49] The first is state law and there's really one state law.

[36:55] It's called density bonus law that was triggered by this project because it includes 15% of units for very low income families.

[37:04] and that triggers certain incentives that the applicant is entitled to per state law.

[37:12] The applicant asked for two incentives with the City Council also per our zoning code.

[37:20] So our zoning code requires that you pre-approved incentives prior to bringing the application

[37:27] for to the planning commission. That's written both into ours on encode and also into state law.

[37:34] And the reason for that is because it takes a considerable amount of financial resources for an applicant to design a project.

[37:42] And they wouldn't want to go through that whole process of designing a project without some idea that the planning commission would consider approval of those incentives.

[37:51] I just want to clarify that because there was some comments in letters that were written that were incorrect around that.

[37:58] So, at that city council meeting, I believe it was in September of last year, you provided preliminary approval for two incentives, one was to increase the height limit to three stories and the other was to ask the applicant to do storm drain improvements on ocean drive for partial credit for required capacity fees.

[38:20] Since that time, it's become clearer that a third is sent to this required for the project.

[38:27] And I'll speak a little bit more to that later, but basically reducing the scope of required visitor serving component of the mixed-use project.

[38:34] So that would be the third request of the applicant.

[38:38] Also, as part of density bonus law, state law requires that a local jurisdiction give a 50% density bonus for a project that provides 15% of units to very low income.

[38:50] community. So that would be 93 units. In this case, the applicants asking for 87.

[38:57] Density bonus law also includes limited parking requirements on which have been applied to this project.

[39:04] And that's 107 spaces. So that's sort of the state law side over which

[39:11] this planning or the city council really only has authority about deciding which incentives you want to apply or not apply.

[39:20] There's also compliance with local laws and those local laws are part of the coastal general plan and coastal land use and development code.

[39:30] Those include laws for the coastal development permit, which include everything from biological resources on this site, coastal access, archaeological resources, scenic resources and availability of public services and infrastructure.

[39:43] There's also a use permit.

[39:45] The use permit includes three components.

[39:50] One, there's a use permit requirement for the multi-family component just on its own.

[39:55] There's also a use permit request to increase the floor area ratio from the 0.4 to 0.7.

[40:02] And I will describe a little bit more what floor area ratio is because I know it's a term

[40:07] of art for the planning community that most people please over on.

[40:11] And then also a shared parking between the one small retail use and the residential use.

[40:18] For their design review in the old days, the city council and the planning commission had a lot of leeway over design review and that is no longer the case for state law.

[40:28] So the state only allows the city to apply quantitative design review criteria. You can no longer apply qualitative design criteria.

[40:37] In other words, if your code says three colors, there needs to be three colors, but you cannot decide whether you like those three colors are not because that's a qualitative thing.

[40:49] When we look at quantitative things, so that's why in the staff report I really focused on just the quantitative aspects of design review and then finally there's a sign permit for this project.

[40:59] So, the Planning Commission had a role in this and that was to provide a recommendation

[41:03] to City Council.

[41:05] They held a hearing two weeks ago and had a 5-0 recommendation to approve project.

[41:10] City Council's role is to either approve or deny the permits.

[41:14] You can also add new special conditions if you like or remove special conditions.

[41:19] If you approve the project, it would be available to the Coastal Commission if you deny

[41:24] the project is not available to the Coastal Commission.

[41:29] Over here, this project is heavily conditioned so there are 37 special conditions in the staff report to make the project comply with the zoning ordinance.

[41:38] So as I go through a project, my goal is to find out every little place where it doesn't comply with the zoning ordinance and include a special condition to ensure that it would comply.

[41:48] There's also eight additional standard conditions that would also be applied to this project, and you of course are welcome to add or remove special conditions.

[42:02] That's a little rendering of project.

[42:06] We're just going to go over the project really quick.

[42:09] There are seven buildings proposed for the project site.

[42:13] And they range in height from 72 feet, I'm sorry, 32 feet to 37 feet made inches and a total of 87 units.

[42:23] Open space on the project site is 46% of the entire parcel or 55,000 square feet total building footprint is 28,000 square feet.

[42:35] The remate, I'm sorry, that should have said 25% of the parcel.

[42:40] Make pictures, please do over.

[42:44] And then the remainder of the site is parking lots and sidewalks for about 30% of the site.

[42:49] The proposed project density is 32 units per acre,

[42:52] and includes 107 parking spaces with 25 trees, 11 bicycle spaces, and 43 EV ready parking spaces,

[43:00] and also significant improvements to front-age road or the unnamed road or harbor avenue.

[43:08] The project would include six studios of 500 square foot each.

[43:13] 36 one bedrooms, there's two different designs of 760 square feet each,

[43:18] and 45 two bedrooms of 1,000 square feet each.

[43:22] Each unit also includes either a private balcony or patio.

[43:28] Landscaping includes 36, I'm sorry, 3,000 square feet of fire retention facilities on the eastern side of the property and 3,700 square feet of other landscape areas.

[43:40] There are 73 trees and multiple native bushes.

[43:45] There are some special conditions added to the landscaping.

[43:48] There's a few non-native plants that would need to be replaced.

[43:54] There's four existing trees that might be saved.

[43:58] There's a requirement to have more parking at the landscaping entrances.

[44:01] So that's been at a special condition.

[44:05] And CDFW has requested the prohibition of planting of invasions.

[44:12] So I want to talk a little bit about the use permit request.

[44:14] Now there are three different use permit requests.

[44:16] The first one is to share parking between the retail use and the residents.

[44:23] uses.

[44:26] So I do want to speak a little bit about the initial project because there's been a

[44:31] little bit of confusion about this. So the applicant originally came to this city and one of

[44:39] might have been August with a plan for 56 units of two story buildings. There were more buildings

[44:47] there were nine buildings instead of seven. And I was doing the staff report and I thought

[44:53] that inclusionary housing no longer applied to city four project because there was some case

[44:56] law and then I looked it up and realized there was a wall of house beds.

[45:00] State of California that made inclusionary housing a thing again. And that's why we went back to the applicant and said that he needed to do inclusionary housing. And so as part of that, he came back to the city asking for incentives.

[45:12] One of the things around inclusionary housing is because they make projects less financially feasible.

[45:19] They're eligible for this density bonus. So the applicant at that point asked for the density bonus and the increased and height in order to accommodate the density bonus.

[45:29] without the increase in height, you can't accommodate the density bonus because there's no place to put the units.

[45:36] So all of that is part of the thing and then also inclusionary housing also has reduced parking requirements.

[45:44] So initially, the project, I thought, required a hundred nine parking spaces, but because of the

[45:53] revision of eliminating one multi-family unit and creating a office retail space as required later in this step and staff report

[46:03] actually comes down to 107 parking spaces. So also one point out that the project does include include 40 new

[46:12] on-street parking spaces. It doesn't mean this applicant will necessarily be eligible to use those on-street parking spaces

[46:19] or their tenants anymore than anybody else,

[46:22] but those on-street parking spaces don't currently exist

[46:24] because there's no parking lane on either harbor avenue

[46:29] or on front to drod right now.

[46:30] By parking lane, parking lane means places where you park along

[46:33] the road bay.

[46:37] Also, one of the things that came up at various hearings

[46:40] was ADA and accessibility.

[46:43] So, per the state building code, nine of the units

[46:46] have to be ADA accessible, and the parking lot

[46:49] does include three accessible parking spaces

[46:52] and there is a cesspool path of travel.

[46:55] I'm throughout most of the project on the ground floor,

[46:57] none of the second or third store units are

[47:00] accessible because there are no elevators.

[47:05] So another reason that you need to use permittance

[47:08] because this is a multi-family project

[47:12] and there are findings in the staff report for that,

[47:15] essentially what you're looking for

[47:17] is the multi-family use incompatible

[47:20] with any of the other uses in the nearby area.

[47:26] And then there's a request for an increase in floor area ratio.

[47:30] So I just want to step back a little bit and say that in the residential zoning districts,

[47:36] there is no floor area ratio limitation from multi-family development.

[47:40] It's understood that a floor area ratio of .4 would not allow you to build multi-family development.

[47:47] That's basically a floor area ratio for commercial projects.

[47:50] Hence, the need to request a use permit for an increase in that FAR.

[47:57] So, what the heck is an FAR?

[48:01] So, floor area ratio is just a way of measuring or limiting the amount of mass that's

[48:07] allowed on a project site.

[48:09] So, in downtown, we have a floor area ratio limitation of two.

[48:14] So, every property in downtown can have twice the amount of square footage of buildings as there is the size of the parcel itself.

[48:26] Yeah, floor area ratio of one would allow you to have just exactly the amount of square footage in the building as the parcel itself, but it could be stacked in two stories and cover half the parcel or maybe three stories and cover a third of the parcel or one story and cover the entirety of the parcel.

[48:43] So you could see how an FAR of 0.4 really only allows you to build a quarter of the whole size of the parcel as you're building, whether it's in 1, 2 or 3 stories.

[48:57] And so the applicant is asking for a boost from 0.4 to 0.7.

[49:02] I would say that these units are modest in size ranging from 500 square feet for the studio to 1,000 square feet for a 2 bedroom.

[49:11] If you are not to increase the FAR as a question by the applicant, they would essentially not be able to build the unit mix that they want and they would have to go down to like all studios.

[49:25] In order to accommodate the density bonus that they're allowed by state law.

[49:32] So you do get into trouble if you don't allow them to build the amount of density that they're allowed by state law.

[49:39] You know, get into a little bit more about that at the end and that's really part of this new law that the state has passed the limits local government's abilities

[49:49] around regulation of multi-family units.

[49:54] So I'm going to talk a little bit about inclusionary housing.

[49:57] So what is inclusionary housing and why does the city have an inclusionary housing ordinance?

[50:02] So, the city adopted an inclusionary housing program in 2009, and the purpose of inclusionary housing is to make developers who are developing for profit, market rate housing include a 15% of those units as an inclusionary units.

[50:22] And because they're doing that, they're eligible for a different law state law, state density

[50:29] bonus law, which is where they get their density bonus and the three incentives from.

[50:36] So this project includes mostly small market rate workforce housing units.

[50:41] There was some concern that they would be able to be changed into condos.

[50:45] There's a whole different process that they would have to go to establish condos.

[50:50] And these units cannot be rented out for vacation rentals because the city prohibits all vacation rentals except for in the central business district.

[50:59] And in the CBD year old, there's only 10 possible vacation rentals allowed and even those haven't been gone yet.

[51:05] So this project asked, well, the city required 15% of inclusionary units.

[51:11] So how does that 15% of inclusionary units get calculated?

[51:15] Is it calculated at the, based on the initial project size of 54 units?

[51:20] Or is it calculated based on the final project size of 87 units?

[51:25] Well, believe it or not, that's written in law.

[51:27] And it's calculated on the initial project of 56 units,

[51:32] which is why only eight units would be inclusionary housing.

[51:35] The density bonus is supposed to help that developer

[51:38] afford to do those units.

[51:42] So for those eight units,

[51:45] they would be available for very low income households

[51:47] or any less than 31,000 per year

[51:50] and rent would be $647 per month.

[51:53] It would be a mix of the studio,

[51:55] one bedrooms and two bedrooms,

[51:57] so they can't just do the studios.

[51:59] And the applicant would enter into a regulatory agreement with the city of Fort Bragg that regulates those units for 35 years of affordability.

[52:11] All right, so I've talked through that. Sorry if I'm going slow, but it's kind of complicated and I think everybody has a little bit more time to wrap their brain about it.

[52:21] So, I want to talk a little bit about, sorry, Zoom is putting all kinds of weird stuff on my screen.

[52:29] I can't rewrite it. So, what is an incentive?

[52:35] It's a term that I've thrown around a bunch around density, bonus law,

[52:38] and incentive is a reduction in a development standard,

[52:41] a development standard, something that you have in your zoning ordinance.

[52:46] So, the applicant came back to me and requested that the first incentive, or the second incentive of the first time they came for you, this thing of doing the stormwater improvements on Ocean Drive and exchange for Cassidy conceptions, doesn't really qualify as an incentive for a development standard.

[53:08] that's more like an agreement between the city and the applicant about how to deal with this stormwater

[53:14] maintenance challenge. So they would like to have that incentive removed and instead they're asking

[53:22] for on the right hand side number two they want to have the minimum balcony size change from a

[53:29] hundred square feet to 42 square feet and their rationale for that I will go over in a minute and then

[53:36] want to move the former incentive number two just to a special condition that the city could

[53:41] enforce through that process.

[53:51] So the first incentive is the high limit reduction.

[53:56] I just want to go over this a little bit. So this would reduce the or increase the building

[54:01] root roofs from 28 feet, which is the current limitation to 32 feet,

[54:08] for all the flat roofs and the 37-t heat for all the shed roofs.

[54:13] I will note that the building site is about five feet below the grade of the highway right now.

[54:18] So the actual experience of the roofs might not be as big.

[54:22] For comparison, the dolphin end is 28 feet and the outlet store is 26 feet.

[54:30] Do you back that up and said that again?

[54:33] What do you want me to say, the whole comparison of the feet?

[54:37] OK, so the building site is five feet below the highway.

[54:44] They're asking for an increase from 28 to 32 feet.

[54:49] That's four feet for most of the buildings.

[54:53] And it's only the top of the pitch where it goes up to 37.8 feet on the pitch truce,

[54:59] which there are a few pitch roofs. So I've shown on these illustrations like this is showing the pitch

[55:07] versus this that which is the normal flat part. So here's the flat part and then here's that little pitch.

[55:15] And just for comparison sake the dolphin is 28 feet and height and the Alice tourists 26 feet and height.

[55:21] But do they belong to the highway level?

[55:27] The, the, the,

[55:28] Alice story is the dolphin and is not.

[55:30] I'm trying to think of.

[55:32] I don't know exactly how is the bird's flesh.

[55:36] I'm gonna, I'm not exactly certain, but the Alice story is about the same level as this

[55:42] parcel.

[55:47] If you look at the top on map.

[55:49] So the second incentive they're now asking for is a reduction in the balcony sizes.

[55:54] So this would really affect the second and third story units that would have private balconies.

[56:00] The bottom floor balconies would still either have 150 square foot patio or 150 square foot little fence stop area for those units.

[56:09] The applicant's asking for this reduced balcony size for a couple of reasons.

[56:13] First, it's a little weird to have a hundred square foot balcony with only a fifty five hundred square foot units.

[56:19] So there's a little bit of a mismatch.

[56:22] It's not a great location throughout door living in terms of the wind and the traffic noise.

[56:27] And overall the visual effect of the project would be more...

[56:34] So we're not as harmonious, maybe, with so many bigger balconies.

[56:40] So that's why they're asking for that reduction.

[56:45] And then the third incentive that they're asking for is to reduce the visitor serving requirement.

[56:51] So the general NN, the zoning code indicates that residential uses are permitted above the ground floor or at the ground floor at the rear of buildings to a maximum density up to 24 units per acre with a conditional use permit now the reason we're going more than 24 units per acre is because state density bonus law trumps the cities 24 units per acre so that's how we got to 33 units per acre.

[57:21] A couple of options that we're discussed with the applicant, so I gave them the idea of maybe converting the bottom four units into hotel rooms.

[57:29] You did not like the idea, while it's financially feasible, he just feels that these would be conflicting uses and would cause trouble.

[57:39] Also looked at the feasibility of providing retail on the bottom floor of all seven buildings.

[57:43] Obviously the retail would be tucked into a residential development and probably no one would shop there.

[57:50] And really it's not financially feasible to do that.

[57:53] And I also don't think it meets the goals of the city with regard to housing,

[57:57] especially given how much vacant retail space the city has these days.

[58:03] I did work with Coastal Community Commission staff and this is very common for city staff and consultants to work with other regulatory agencies

[58:11] to figure out solutions to issues, so we also consult with the Fire Department, we consult with California Department of Fish and Wildlife, we consult with the Coastal Commission.

[58:23] The Coastal Commission staff's feeling was that they needed to turn at least one unit into a retail storefront in order to meet the spirit of this law.

[58:32] And if a density bonus law incentive was used to reduce the rest, so that's what the applicant is asking for and where we are with this in the project.

[58:43] So there are other permanent issues that are addressed in the staff report and I'm going to go through each of these.

[58:49] And then I also have a slide that has all sort of a summary of all the comments if I could barely say that you could ever summarize people's comments and I'll respond to those and then I want to close with a little bit more housing law.

[59:03] So this area is not mapped for view protection by the coastal general plan.

[59:09] What that means is that no visual analysis is required, and these views are not considered protected.

[59:16] They're constrained already in blocked by trees, bushes, and development to the west of the parcel.

[59:24] The project site has no environmentally sensitive habitat area, so a full biological study was done in 2018 and 2024.

[59:31] and no sensitive habitat areas were found.

[59:37] There are four trees that of themselves do not constitute a rare plant community.

[59:44] And those are shown showing retain retain and retain and retain.

[59:50] And so CDFW asked for two special conditions.

[59:54] One would be to retain those trees as feasible.

[59:58] It's not totally clear that they're feasible.

[59:59] both.

[1:00:00] All to retain these two up here would be in a via retention area, and these two would be this one's kind of not going to be likely to be retained.

[1:00:10] It's right next to a building, but this one is near the kids park and likely could be retained, and then also there's a requirement for pre-construction bird surveys.

[1:00:21] Another important part of the coastal act is to ensure that there's water availability for coastal dependent uses basically visitor serving uses so they required

[1:00:31] the city to prepare a water budget so the first table is the water budget for the project and it assumes basically about 7,000 gallons of water use per day for the 87 units or about 2.5 million gallons of water use per year.

[1:00:49] And in the old days, this probably would have stopped this project, but more recently the city has invested a lot in new water projects that do address the water concerns primarily there's been a deep package desalination plant that was added in 2022 that allows the city to take up to 144,000 gallons of additional water from the Niagara River, which by itself would more than compensate for the six, the 7,000 gallons of this project would use.

[1:01:18] Additionally, the raw waterline replacement project is underway right now, and that's limiting water loss through leaks.

[1:01:26] And then the water conservation project, similar thing, helps the city identify water leaks in residential uses throughout the city.

[1:01:33] So all together, those are going to save about 200,000 gallons of water a day. Again, more than enough to cover the needs of this project.

[1:01:44] Circulation in coastal access has also been brought up quite a bit by the neighbors and is a concern for this project.

[1:01:51] So, right now, Pomobloff's Park is right here and there was some concern from neighbors that people might walk out.

[1:02:00] Emotions you drive to get to Pomobloff's Park. I think that's highly unlikely given that they can just walk right out here.

[1:02:06] So this is really the pedestrian access of a bicycle access on the POMO Bluffs Park.

[1:02:12] This would be more of a particular access.

[1:02:15] The internal circulation for the project would allow people to leave on to Harbor Avenue

[1:02:22] and go east found on Ocean Drive to the signalized intersection to make either a laughter turn or go across the highway.

[1:02:30] I do want to make something clear, a sequa has changed and so has traffic studies with

[1:02:38] regard to traffic. Basically nobody worries about level of service anymore. It's okay

[1:02:45] for people to wait and traffic, but concern is more vehicle miles traveled. So the idea

[1:02:51] was before everybody was worried about levels of service and what that led to was a lot of

[1:02:56] and sprawl. So people would be driving further and further and further so as to not cause traffic

[1:03:02] jams. And now the whole state has sort of recognized the traffic jams are a part of life.

[1:03:08] And actually what we need to be focused on is densification of urban cores so that people don't

[1:03:13] drive as far, which is why we look at vehicle miles traveled. So for example, cow trans anymore

[1:03:19] doesn't care about level of service. They care about two things. Vehicle miles traveled and safety.

[1:03:25] those are their only concerns. So for this project safety is an issue and mostly it's an issue

[1:03:33] at this intersection right here for people who are coming out and wanting to drive north

[1:03:38] down onto Highway 1 from the out grocery out or the outlet store entrance. So one of the mitigations

[1:03:46] for this project is to require a right hand turn only sign here so people cannot make a left onto

[1:03:54] highway one. There's also a keep clear find that would need to be installed here and here so that people

[1:04:02] driving out don't block the intersections for others going back and that's shown on the next slide.

[1:04:13] So keep clear the extend the lane striping on ocean view drive and then no left turn on on each

[1:04:19] down front-age road.

[1:04:22] So this project would possibly have 1097 people.

[1:04:26] I would say that is a high-end estimate,

[1:04:30] because on the mind of, well, at least half the units

[1:04:33] or studios are one bedrooms.

[1:04:36] But that's taking the city's current population per household,

[1:04:41] which is 2.3 people per household times the number of units.

[1:04:44] That's how I got that.

[1:04:46] And through software generation,

[1:04:47] that produces 466 trips per day and this trip level is very similar to autosone project.

[1:04:54] Right now the city doesn't regulate LOS on signalized intersections and on any small street

[1:05:03] that hits highway one level of service of F or low is considered acceptable and F is as low as

[1:05:10] you can

[1:05:13] get. So I'm going to talk a little bit about the storm water system right now.

[1:05:17] So, the storm water system consists of a number of drains that drain to a central reservoir that then also drains to infiltration basins.

[1:05:31] So, what's the purpose of an infiltration basins?

[1:05:34] An infiltration basins is engineered with different soil levels and plant communities to screen out pollutants from the storm water before they enter the groundwater.

[1:05:44] their designs for that very purpose and one of the special conditions requires that these get

[1:05:50] maintained on an annual basis. The project will allow for a lot of stormwater infiltration in

[1:05:56] the green areas as well. Additionally, we're requiring rainwater capture tanks on four of the

[1:06:03] buildings that will capture the rainwater into a large tank which will then later infiltrate

[1:06:08] that's warm water into the ground at a much slower rate,

[1:06:11] so it basically captures the big downpours

[1:06:14] and then allows it to trickle out later.

[1:06:18] Any, so the most important piece of this

[1:06:21] is that the actual stormwater discharge peak discharge

[1:06:24] is gonna be less after this project than it currently is.

[1:06:30] Sounds crazy, but that's what they can do

[1:06:32] with stormwater management now.

[1:06:33] So we'll essentially fall from 6.12 cubic feet per second,

[1:06:38] which is how much comes off this site right now

[1:06:40] in a really big storm growing of a storm event,

[1:06:44] down to 0.3532, I'm sorry, 0.35 to cubic feet per second.

[1:06:50] So that's a net decrease in stormwater discharge.

[1:06:54] The excess stormwater discharge

[1:06:55] will go into the ocean view drive storm drain system,

[1:06:58] which the applicant is also being required to upgrade.

[1:07:04] So unfortunately, I didn't address this issue

[1:07:07] for the planning commission,

[1:07:08] But it did come up justifiably at the planning commission's hearing.

[1:07:12] So I did want to talk about groundwater recharge.

[1:07:15] So there is a policy in the city's general plan that requires a city

[1:07:20] to protect aquifers, groundwater aquifers.

[1:07:24] So going through the project again, 46% of the site would be open space

[1:07:29] in landscape areas, which allow for recharge.

[1:07:32] The building footprints are relatively small at 28,000 square feet,

[1:07:37] but only 8,000 square feet of that would not be attached to a catchment ink.

[1:07:43] And then that, like I just said, the parking lot is connected through this system to a bio-svel system to pre-treat and infiltrate stormwater.

[1:07:51] As I looked at groundwater as a whole on Todd's point, this is a study called the Nolan study that was completed actually in the 90s for a different project.

[1:08:02] And that project, that setty found that overall in Todd's point, there's 348 acre feet of water storage in the groundwater.

[1:08:13] And I'm not a groundwater expert, but basically they figured out that geological formations and how much water it could store.

[1:08:22] And they also looked at well records, the proposed project, groundwater impact, none of these things were true, and all of the impervious surface was not going to groundwater would be an impact of 1.21 acre feet, all of the current groundwater use on the site.

[1:08:46] So that includes all of Todd's point, every residential development is about 9.2 acre feet per year.

[1:08:56] So that leaves about 337 acre feet of groundwater in the ground that's not getting used.

[1:09:02] Another way to look at this is 98% of Todd's point is undeveloped pervious services.

[1:09:08] And 1.3% of Todd's point is developed in-purpose services that includes roads, rooftops, parking lots, the school.

[1:09:19] The project would add to that 0.08% of in-purpose service.

[1:09:27] By your safety, so as I mentioned, there are two fire hydrants in the project site, and there are three egresses in and out for fire safety.

[1:09:37] this has project has been looked at by the fair marshal and he said it looks good although he'll always have more comments

[1:09:43] have the building permit stage which is for you. I just wanted to give you a sense of the special conditions. Now,

[1:09:50] this is not my special condition language. As you know, when I write special conditions, they're very bullet proof.

[1:09:57] I'm just just to give you a sense of two more motorcycle spaces, 50 square footers shrubs at parking lot

[1:10:03] entrances, the issue around the balconies still needs to be resolved.

[1:10:08] It has to be an entrance, an entrance needing to be added to the east side of the building 3-7.

[1:10:14] A sound wall would need to be constructed to be the parking lot in Harbor Avenue to reduce noise for the neighbors.

[1:10:20] They have to enter into a regulatory agreement with the city to ensure affordability of all the units.

[1:10:25] They need to establish a visitor serving use in one unit, tribal monitoring during moving activities is required.

[1:10:31] If any culture resources or human remains are discovered, there are specific procedures required

[1:10:37] for that prior to construction of bird survey must be completed.

[1:10:41] They have to retain four trees if feasible.

[1:10:44] They have to re-submit their landscaping plan with no non-native species.

[1:10:48] They have to refrain from planning any invasive species.

[1:10:51] The utility hookup configurations have to be public works requirements.

[1:10:55] Public works has a lot of requirements.

[1:10:56] I didn't detail those because it's a lot.

[1:11:01] They have to install traffic control signage.

[1:11:03] They have to install a bus to stop for MTA and school buses, install road and sidewalk improvements

[1:11:09] to Harbor Avenue from a road and dedicate those to the city.

[1:11:13] Don't improve the parking lot on the west side of Harbor Ave except as a bios well for neighbors

[1:11:19] requests, installing catchment tanks for buildings, no use of inorganic landscaping chemicals.

[1:11:25] they need to install a full trash capture device in the storm drain system. They need to

[1:11:30] install all storm drain outlets and they have to do an annual inspection of all storm drain

[1:11:35] systems. They have to submit a storm water management plan or a swip. This is the construction storm

[1:11:43] water management plan, which some people express concerns about. They have to complete the offsite storm

[1:11:48] drain improvements for ocean drive with a dollar for dollar change for capacity for reduction.

[1:11:54] They have to submit and follow a project specific geotechnical study.

[1:11:59] They have to make the fence a little fancier.

[1:12:02] They have to submit a plan for a seeding area and playground equipment for the playground.

[1:12:06] They have to include directory and individual lighting unit numbers, and they also have to visually screen all outdoor equipment.

[1:12:13] I'm almost done.

[1:12:15] So some community concerns that I glean from reading all of the letters in the last meeting.

[1:12:21] I think we've talked to a lot, compatibility with the neighborhood.

[1:12:28] I think that's been addressed in the staff report.

[1:12:31] Construction noise is currently limited by the city's noise ordinance.

[1:12:35] The applicant would not be able to do any construction between 7 am and 530 pm.

[1:12:40] If you want to extend those hours or shorten them, you can do that tonight with a special condition.

[1:12:46] There's concerned about traffic congestion, traffic congestion is no longer a

[1:12:51] secret issue. There's concern about traffic access through Harbor RV Park.

[1:12:56] There's no roadway that exists legal roadway that exists through Harbor RV

[1:13:00] Park. If they do not want vehicles passing through their Harbor Park, they can

[1:13:05] install events to keep vehicles out. There's concern about traffic safety.

[1:13:15] The

[1:13:15] So left-hand signal is the null left-hand turn from the front-end drove connection on the highway one.

[1:13:23] We would eliminate that as a traffic safety concern as would keep clear signage at the intersection of harbor, avenue, and ocean drive, and the intersection of front-end road and ocean drive.

[1:13:38] Crosswalks and sidewalks. There are no crosswalks required of this project, but you could add that as a special condition if you want.

[1:13:44] Sidewalks are being completed on throughout the project site itself, but no off site sidewalk improvements have been required if you want to require those you can.

[1:13:55] Um, dumpster runoff is run through the same bio filtration system as parking lot runoff, so I don't think it should be an issue.

[1:14:05] Groundwater safety, I've discussed the groundwater issues. Groundwater here is 20 feet below top of surface, so it's pretty unlikely that contaminates we're going to get down that far.

[1:14:15] Solar is required at the time of building permits.

[1:14:18] That's not addressed in the planning permit process.

[1:14:22] The school bus route.

[1:14:25] I'm going to leave to the school bus to figure out the school people.

[1:14:28] Stormwater issues are managed through the construction building permit and the grading permit and the slip.

[1:14:36] I've talked through fire safety.

[1:14:39] The calculation of the affordable unit percentage.

[1:14:41] I've discussed how that's calculated on the original project.

[1:14:43] also already discussed the vision visitor serving requirements and the reason that none of those incentives are a variance is because they're required by state housing loss, so there's no obligation or in fact the city could not.

[1:15:00] Not require a variance for those. They are obligated by state housing law.

[1:15:07] Okay, and then the last thing I just want to remind you of is the Housing Accountability Act and this regulates all municipalities and counties throughout the state of California and not just for a flag, and it's severely limits, but local governments may do with regard to denial, reduction of density, or making an infeasible any housing project, emergency shelter or farm worker housing.

[1:15:28] They're consistent with objective local development standards.

[1:15:32] Essentially, the city can only design deny a housing project of two conditions are met.

[1:15:37] First, there must be a specific adverse impact upon the public health or safety.

[1:15:42] And second, there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid that adverse impact.

[1:15:50] Those are the only conditions under which you can deny housing project.

[1:15:55] In the old days, we used to be able to wave our hands and say we're the only people who can understand consistency.

[1:16:01] That's no longer the case, the Housing Accountability Act requires that a reasonable person can apply the zoning regulations and know what they need.

[1:16:12] None of the density bonus incentives, concessions or the density bonus itself is a valid basis to find a project inconsistent with zoning laws under the Housing Accountability Act.

[1:16:23] In addition, the local government must provide written notification and documentation of any inconsistency, non-compliance, or in conformancy within 30 days of a complete application.

[1:16:37] If we fail to provide that information, the how the project is deemed consistent, and if the city wants to take, sorry.

[1:16:49] There we go. If the city wants to deny this project and the applicant decides to take the city's court, finds can be up to $10,000 per unit, less recovered attorneys fees.

[1:17:03] So, I don't mean to scare you, but I just want the city council and also the public to understand the state law constraints that we're all dealing with.

[1:17:13] And with that, I will stop sharing my screen and available to answer any questions.

[1:17:18] I'm sorry, thanks so much for that.

[1:17:22] Alex, I invite questions.

[1:17:24] Council member Peter.

[1:17:25] Yeah, I have some questions.

[1:17:27] I got it correctly.

[1:17:30] So,

[1:17:32] one of those conditions about storm drain improvements on ocean drive

[1:17:38] has sort of been altered down to the reduced balcony size instead.

[1:17:43] I get that right.

[1:17:45] Yeah, that would be an incentive.

[1:17:47] Well, that's what I meant and sent it that condition. My apologies. Thank you for the right terminology.

[1:17:53] And then the 15% is from the original number of 56 not 87, which is the number of units actually planned.

[1:18:03] 15% of 56 is eight. Yes, there as 50% of 87 is 15

[1:18:12] So that's what the difference is there because there were some concern and I had some questions from comments made by the public that that my attention, so

[1:18:22] I understood that correctly you did understand that correctly and we are dealing with three use permits one having to do with parking

[1:18:31] One having to do with changing it to multi-family units that particular area and the retail makes there and the third use permit has to do with floor area

[1:18:41] ratio is that correct? Yeah, um, the as a long staff report, and I was, you, you have it, you

[1:18:49] could correct, yes. I think I have that correct, and currently in their code, um,

[1:18:56] point four is, is the number, but they want that incentive, they need to use permit to change it

[1:19:01] to point seven to make it financially feasible. Correct. Okay. Um, water's not an issue according to

[1:19:08] study? Yes, and as per my conversations with the director of public work. Okay, and we can go into this more with other questions. I just okay. I want to make sure I understood this and the California Coast Commission has sort of a view shed.

[1:19:22] thing that they look at and according to whatever parameters those include there is no loss of

[1:19:27] ocean view with the construction of these units. According to the coastal commission did I hear that correctly.

[1:19:34] I wouldn't say that it's according to the coastal commission. I would say it's according to our coastal general plan.

[1:19:38] There's a map and on that map, this parcel is not indicated as a parcel that has a view shed for protection.

[1:19:45] So that was our determination of the Costa Commission.

[1:19:48] Well, it's kind of both because it's part of our coastal

[1:19:52] general plan, which the Costa Commission certifies.

[1:19:55] But they haven't waited on this specific project,

[1:19:58] but that's what the map and the policy say.

[1:20:00] So I'm applying them.

[1:20:03] Now, back to that left turn and there's traffic safety issue.

[1:20:08] I just assume you take that thing out completely myself.

[1:20:12] But I'm just one.

[1:20:12] I don't think we really need an ingress egress there. It's dangerous, but that's just me, and that's a comment on a question.

[1:20:20] The question would be, and maybe this is for John, I know the skeletons not us.

[1:20:25] But if we were to have a no-left turn sign, you know, it didn't work too well on Harbor Drive there.

[1:20:32] People turn left all the time and people turn left out of the passage. My question is, could you put some sort of center divider along that particular area,

[1:20:41] which man they couldn't turn left, they'd have to turn right. And I know that's

[1:20:47] calterans, but I'm just thinking if you're going to let that thing stay open to me

[1:20:51] to displace someone from turning left would be to put a center divider that they before

[1:20:55] we'll probably might be able to go over the most of the cars. So that's just that's kind of a

[1:20:59] question whether or not we could we could do that or convince them to do that or have the

[1:21:04] little bit to do that. The stormwater discharge goes down from 6.1 cubic feet to 0.035

[1:21:12] cubic feet with the new storm water discharge systems that are available. And I hear that correctly.

[1:21:18] That's correct. And where are the neighbors noticed properly?

[1:21:24] Yeah, per our code they were known as correctly. So our code is what? Within 300 feet?

[1:21:29] Within 300 feet, you get a letter. The property was posted with signage, and there was also a

[1:21:36] hearing notice in the paper. Okay. I always been one to feel, you know, one in doubt make it 500 feet.

[1:21:42] better than 300 or whatever, you know, go too far rather than not far enough.

[1:21:46] Anyway, so there were some complaints, but we'll get properly noticed.

[1:21:50] So, okay. Good. All right. Well, those are all my questions for now. Thank you.

[1:21:56] All right. Thank you, Councilmember Altman Smith.

[1:22:00] Wow. Thank you, Marie. So complete.

[1:22:04] Only a couple of questions. So, I was trying to figure out if these are only rentals or if they

[1:22:11] be owned. The applicant is proposing them only as rentals. If they want to change it into a

[1:22:17] condo, there's a process that they'd have to go through with the City of Fort Bragg that

[1:22:21] includes a use permit process with the planning commission to make it into condos. I will say

[1:22:27] that because the applicant is applying for the project as rental housing,

[1:22:35] but inclusionary housing units

[1:22:36] would need to remain rental housing for the 35 years

[1:22:40] of the regulatory agreement,

[1:22:42] irrespective of whatever happened to other units.

[1:22:45] And the city doesn't have any kind of a rent control

[1:22:48] on design, but with these affordable apartments,

[1:22:57] it said you said something about having to go back

[1:22:59] to the city to if somebody, it says in here that if they want

[1:23:05] change.

[1:23:09] If somebody was in an affordable housing and somebody changed, then they'd have to go through this city

[1:23:17] to get a who's going to monitor whether the next person is affordable. Let me ask you that way.

[1:23:22] Yeah, that is monitored by the city by the city. Right. And so do we have someone in the is it a planning department person that would do that?

[1:23:30] It would be a planning department responsibility as okay. So we're going to maintain somehow maintain the affordable right now. The city has one includes in our unit and every time it turns over we do income verification on that unit.

[1:23:45] Good. Okay.

[1:23:49] I personally would like to see a sidewalk.

[1:23:52] Improvements to hardware drive and there was a question about the improvements are already proposed for the east side of

[1:24:00] Harper Drive? That's all. Yeah. We wanted them on the west side. I guess not.

[1:24:09] ADA access was a question to plomoblofs. Is that something we're dealing with? Or we could deal with?

[1:24:20] There's really no ADA access from this site to plomoblofs. And it's a little bit the on the scope

[1:24:26] of the city and feel free to chime in Baron if you think I'm off with Mark here to require

[1:24:33] the applicant to do AEDA improvements that are not on their site. So,

[1:24:38] similarly if someone has the AEDA issues, they probably have a vehicle, they can get in their

[1:24:42] vehicle and drive to Palma Bluffs where there are AEDA parking spaces as there are in all the coastal

[1:24:47] trail properties.

[1:24:50] Okay, I'm interested in what other public has to say on that. All right,

[1:24:56] Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor, questions.

[1:24:57] Yeah, thank

[1:25:00] you.

[1:25:01] I think most of my questions were answered.

[1:25:03] I mean, it's very thorough.

[1:25:05] You addressed a lot of those comments that came up.

[1:25:08] So I appreciate that.

[1:25:09] You welcome.

[1:25:10] I wanted to thank you for this staff report, too.

[1:25:12] Yeah, it was impressive.

[1:25:13] This is sink and very informational.

[1:25:15] Thank you.

[1:25:17] And responsive.

[1:25:19] Okay, so if there are no further questions,

[1:25:22] then I would open the public hearing.

[1:25:26] 726. We would look to hear comments from the public and the room on this item of business.

[1:25:39] Hi there, my name is Paul Clark. Head of those questions with Linda. I've been here since 1976.

[1:25:45] I was on the planning commission that implemented the 1982 General Plan, which was replaced by the one that was approved in 2002, but not certified by the close to commission.

[1:25:56] and two thousand five. So I have a little bit of knowledge. Part of this whole thing is a perception

[1:26:02] of the cities going to lose this one. You already have the perception from a lot of the people

[1:26:06] in the community that I heard that you sold out everyone. This is a huge project. I would like to know,

[1:26:14] I looked up, I'm rambling a little bit, I took some notes, I looked up on the internet, found three

[1:26:20] density bonus resources in California. One was San Francisco somewhere else.

[1:26:27] the incentives, inclusionary housing, and centers that way they all offered was density bonus,

[1:26:33] expediting process, expedited processing, fee-waters, parking reductions, and tax abatement of the

[1:26:40] three I printed out none of them said anything about height restriction. That to me is a variance.

[1:26:45] I don't want to understand it. We just agree with this. This is all coming around from

[1:26:51] the previous council of 2024. There was one change in the membership period. The city came up with

[1:26:58] their 200 units goal in 2026. That's absurd. But I can see you're the zeal of this property.

[1:27:08] I'm disappointed that this has such a high density. I'm anxious to hear what the neighbors have to say.

[1:27:15] Part of the problem is the groups that don't have any process.

[1:27:21] They're exempt from this. They're exempt from that. I've watched it anyway. I don't have too much time.

[1:27:28] But normally in a project this big, the city, but of course they're exempt, you'd have

[1:27:33] story bowls out there, so people would see the size of the structure. They're not doing it.

[1:27:38] In Lindi, I think you'll back me up on this one. I could be wrong, but I think you're with me on this one.

[1:27:43] The intent of this general plan when it was done to have commercial buildings with residential

[1:27:48] as an use permit, it's commercial, highway visitor commercial, commercial on the ground floor,

[1:27:57] secondary use would be residential. It's limited by the size of this is very different on

[1:28:02] shore. This plan has been changed much but I think that's what they talked about and the

[1:28:10] commercial sizes are limited. So it limits the number of residences that could be feasibly

[1:28:16] developer book. This is not a commercial mix. It is a residential property. It should be

[1:28:23] resolved. If that's what you want to do, I'm shocked that this application was even accepted

[1:28:29] by the city. It's unfortunate that the developers are doing this, but they don't understand

[1:28:34] the community quite yet. But I'd have new people coming in and invested in the community. This

[1:28:40] is bizarre.

[1:28:42] All right. Thank you. Other comments from folks on

[1:28:44] them.

[1:28:54] Thank you for listening. My name is

[1:28:56] Kathleen Zerobby and I've heard this

[1:28:58] said before that I don't know when

[1:29:02] it rose. No.

[1:29:05] Marie, she had mentioned.

[1:29:08] Last, I think it was last meeting

[1:29:10] we got together. She mentioned something

[1:29:12] again about the zone, the auto zone,

[1:29:16] having four hundred ins,

[1:29:17] a couple of little amount of people coming into AutoZone

[1:29:20] that's going to be coming in this department complex.

[1:29:23] I disagree with that completely because, to me,

[1:29:27] all these people have children that have to go to school,

[1:29:30] come back from school, go to their sports,

[1:29:33] come back from sports and go to work, come back.

[1:29:36] You're going to say four and six people are,

[1:29:38] it's the same at AutoZone.

[1:29:40] I would have AutoZone and get a part in the home.

[1:29:42] If I have to get another part, okay, that's two.

[1:29:44] but I would never order in six as absurd to compare those two, and another thing when it was mentioned that

[1:29:52] while we had used to this traffic, what a shame. I loved this scene, and I loved this small

[1:29:57] the city and it was mentioned that we

[1:30:00] I have to get used to this traffic. I don't want to get used to this. I came here to get away from that. Before you know it's going to be just like the Bay Area, just like San Francisco, just like all of it, trying to keep it small for all of us. So all these tourists, they left the small city. They want to come and see it.

[1:30:17] want to be stuck at Ocean Drive and Highway 1 for 20 minutes direct. What the heck is what they

[1:30:23] will come at? They're saying it's just too busy. It's what happened to the city and it's

[1:30:27] one development. I'm not against development, go for it. But this is overboard. I think way overboard.

[1:30:35] It's going to be so congested and all I'm saying, take a drive out there if you, if you will,

[1:30:41] just take a drive. Our house is directly in front of this and that's okay. We were there first,

[1:30:46] but that's okay.

[1:30:48] This driving, I don't know how long it's gonna take for me

[1:30:50] to get on ocean if you drive.

[1:30:52] Cause it's hard now to get on ocean if you drive sometimes.

[1:30:55] And you can't really see on those sides.

[1:30:57] I drive it every day to have this amount of people

[1:31:00] going up and down and then you know

[1:31:02] is mentioned that we have a part that says

[1:31:05] what did she mention of part where people have to stop

[1:31:09] and allow people that's not gonna happen.

[1:31:11] People are not gonna hear that.

[1:31:13] And I'm just saying it's gonna be a joke

[1:31:14] And I just don't want to see the city turn into the big city.

[1:31:18] It's going to be because we're letting it happen.

[1:31:21] So thank you very much.

[1:31:24] All right. Thank you.

[1:31:25] Anyone else like to comment in the room?

[1:31:34] Hi, my name is Patio.

[1:31:36] Pat's and Marie Jones.

[1:31:37] Thank you very much.

[1:31:38] That was informative and the size.

[1:31:43] And I almost understood most of it.

[1:31:46] My objection is the height.

[1:31:51] And second, on that third floor, what are you going to look at, the ocean, and we folks here in town understand the cost of looking at the ocean.

[1:32:04] So my second concern is condo conversion.

[1:32:10] These folks, correct me, Marie, I'm not quite sure I understand there from out of the area, so this is investment property.

[1:32:21] When they own the dolphin in, did Jason property, so I don't know if they're out of the area.

[1:32:26] But Maria, I don't have to answer any questions right now.

[1:32:29] Thank you.

[1:32:30] Well, if there are local folks at part of the community, you know, I'm all for that.

[1:32:37] I'm all for them making a buck.

[1:32:39] But I just see in the future, condo conversion is a writing on the wall.

[1:32:44] Now those six or eight units are protected, but the rest of those units,

[1:32:48] And the associated traffic that comes with them, I just think folks aren't looking at that.

[1:32:58] If this was condos, as if the initial applicant application was for condominiums,

[1:33:04] I think it'd be a different story. It will be condominiums.

[1:33:10] Maybe none of my lifetime, but I think eventually it will be. Thank you.

[1:33:16] All right, thank you. Other comments.

[1:33:20] Hi, Tim Bosma. I hope people can take this as just a bit of my

[1:33:27] personal outlook on this rather than having it feel like it's some sort of attack on some of the

[1:33:34] feelings about this project. But I think that one of the things that this is trying to do is trying

[1:33:40] address actual housing concerns that we have in our community. One of my main concerns that I have

[1:33:48] as an employer is how difficult it is to have people who are coming in to an entry level at my

[1:33:52] job and being able to find a place to live out here. This place has a tremendous drop of people,

[1:33:58] people love the idea of living in such a wonderful place as Fort Bragg. The fact of the matter is

[1:34:05] unless you already have something lined up for housing,

[1:34:09] it is very difficult at the very least to find a place

[1:34:15] to be able to live.

[1:34:17] This is starting to address it.

[1:34:18] I understand that people are upset because they feel that it's too much,

[1:34:23] or it's too big, or there's concerns about how it's going to be used.

[1:34:28] I think that every single project that we do,

[1:34:30] we should have a certain amount of housing

[1:34:35] that should be given to the workers in our community.

[1:34:40] I have lost employees because they can not

[1:34:43] find a place to live out here.

[1:34:45] And I have people who have to leave on a regular basis

[1:34:49] because they can not find a place to start a home with their families.

[1:34:57] I know it's difficult, but I would like to challenge

[1:35:00] the people in this community to think about, where people that they would consider children,

[1:35:07] you know, their children growing up, where would they go to to live here in Fort Bragg?

[1:35:13] I'll leave it at that. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Other comments from folks in

[1:35:21] Hi, my name is Judy Mascher as that, and I live out in Todd's point and the chief knows

[1:35:29] me too.

[1:35:29] We have a lot of problems with the traffic already, we live out by the park, so we're not,

[1:35:35] but we do have a well during a drought one time we did have to have water trucked in, so

[1:35:40] we do get droughts here, but the traffic level, if you guys could just come out there, I'm

[1:35:47] and talk a weekend is worse, even just during the week. Sunset, morning, we have cars coming

[1:35:53] out there, 230, the main traffic starts around four, coming in and out, a couple of those

[1:35:58] dark up and down the cliffway. And they're not driving this speed limit, you know, but also

[1:36:04] there's no ADA access from what they want to develop to the trail. That trail is supposed to be

[1:36:17] But there is no ADA. We have people walking down ocean view all the time during the summer.

[1:36:25] Going down to look at the ocean view. It's dangerous. You come out of the harbor. You can't see.

[1:36:31] Can't see when you're turning right or left. You've got a really full way out there.

[1:36:35] But we do have people, bicycles, kids, parents, dogs, people walking their pets. They use ocean view constantly.

[1:36:45] somebody's gonna get killed out there. This, so this thing is great, but this is not the right place for it.

[1:36:52] Find another place, but not the gateway into Fort Drag, where tourists come to look.

[1:36:58] Yes, you do get a glimpse of the ocean. No matter what anybody is going to tell me, I've been there.

[1:37:03] I go there all the time. I can see the ocean. That's the first thing I look for.

[1:37:08] First thing I look for, even before I bought here was the ocean view.

[1:37:12] And that's what we have. This thing is too big for this place. It's just too big. You're talking

[1:37:20] three stories. That's, it doesn't even belong here. This city isn't ready for that size and

[1:37:27] right there. Find another lot. I know they got the lot cheap and that's why they want to build it up.

[1:37:34] Find somewhere to do it right. That is not the right place. It's dangerous. The traffic is going

[1:37:40] be horrendous not only going on to ocean view coming from my way one, we come out 20, we have

[1:37:47] to pull out, we have to pull out to get in the turn lane, can you imagine the traffic we're

[1:37:52] going to have backed up with people going to the apartments to get even down to ocean view.

[1:37:58] Okay, so fire say there is a tsunami. How are we going to get out with all those cars?

[1:38:03] That place is busy enough already. You can ask the police department how many automobiles are just

[1:38:09] constantly. Traffic is extremely heavy and it's a dangerous. Somebody is going to get killed out there

[1:38:15] walking. This thing is just too big for this area. We do need housing but not there. Thank you.

[1:38:22] All right, thank you.

[1:38:31] My name is Brittany and I am a homeowner within Harbor RV trailer.

[1:38:36] I'm going along with exactly what was said. The area's dangerous. I am one of those people that

[1:38:42] lockdown, Harvard, Harvard view, I'm one of those people that almost get hit almost every day

[1:38:50] from someone driving entirely too fast, not paying attention. I'm one of the people that you

[1:38:55] use Harvard Avenue to try and exit on that blind turn where you cannot see left or right.

[1:39:03] Traffic from 87 units is going to make the congestion from the intersection of highway one,

[1:39:08] an ocean view drive, far more difficult to manage, and it's going to add frustrations throughout

[1:39:13] entire day. A large item that not enough people are recognizing, it was finally stated earlier,

[1:39:22] Harbor RV is not just residential, it's for tourism. So what happens during the high of

[1:39:29] tourist season? You have traveling RVs, you have all the congestion from Emeralds often in it itself,

[1:39:35] you have all the congestion from no-A river grill, you have all the congestion from the residents,

[1:39:39] and you have all of the congestion from the POMO park. And now you want to add 107 parking spaces

[1:39:47] with multiple hundreds of people living in that small area. I understand at the initial meeting,

[1:39:53] be prolonged to make the intersection longer for the track of traffic light. That doesn't work

[1:40:00] with harbor avenue, being a blind turn, and it also doesn't work with the tightest turn

[1:40:06] that is already on the unnamed front edge road. During the last city council meeting,

[1:40:13] it was brought up by a lot of my neighbors that the parking lot should be moved to the east side.

[1:40:19] That is a voice that needs to be looked at and concerned. However, avenue does not need to be

[1:40:24] paved, that does not need to be the access point with these 107 parking slots. Do you want to do

[1:40:29] anything with this project? Get it moved to the east side or it's a lot more feasible for the unnamed

[1:40:36] our community needs more housing.

[1:40:39] I'm a person that spent 10 years trying to get a house

[1:40:41] and I'm finally a homeowner in this community

[1:40:43] of Harbor RB and the Poem of Bloops.

[1:40:47] We need housing.

[1:40:48] These plans, however, are too big.

[1:40:51] It's too high.

[1:40:52] It's too congested.

[1:40:54] And I'm sorry.

[1:40:55] The biggest thing we need to look at,

[1:40:59] look at our coastal town.

[1:41:01] Do we really want to destroy the classic

[1:41:04] coastal eel of Fort Brad by when you enter, you see basically a skyscraper, representing

[1:41:13] the cities, Pizmo Beach, Ventura. That's not what our communities about. That's not what

[1:41:20] we need. Housing, yes, this development, no. Thank you.

[1:41:24] All right, thank you. Anyone else?

[1:41:37] Mayor, I want to say it's customary for the applicant to have a chance to speak as well.

[1:41:51] I didn't know if everything was okay.

[1:41:55] Well, do you want to, are you suggesting we do that now?

[1:41:58] Well, you're wish, but usually the applicant speaks before the public, but certainly they should at least have a chance to speak at some point.

[1:42:05] Absolutely, thank you.

[1:42:11] My name is Guy Burnett.

[1:42:12] I'm a resident on Barbara Avenue.

[1:42:15] And I'm asking you the please reschedule this hearing until the following

[1:42:20] violations are corrected, and all of the proposal changes, additions have been discussed, ruled-in, ruled-out, and there's a final plan, so you know, and we know what is on the table right now, it's pilot pudding.

[1:42:39] The storm drain catchment plug is plugged in and does not functioning at Harbor Avenue and Ocean View.

[1:42:48] The city has refused, the city has refused to clean it up so that it would drain.

[1:42:55] I get 20 to 30 gallons of minute running through my property when it's raining.

[1:43:01] This project, when the overflow goes in and they start trying to pump it into those drainage systems, I could see a hundred gallons a minute going through my property, undermining my fences and my walkways.

[1:43:18] The light pollution is a failure of the down, where does it the downcast lighting? Those pictures you're looking at are taken from my property.

[1:43:28] The first one is what the light comes into my bedroom at night, 24 or well, 16 hours at night.

[1:43:37] The others, you can't tell the difference on the 4th of July between Fort Bragg and the Youth Car Lot and Fresno.

[1:43:50] Let's see.

[1:43:54] Well, okay.

[1:43:58] The storm drains are non-functioning. That has to be resolved. I suggest that the storm

[1:44:08] water drainage go north to the Pomo-Bless Park. Catchment basins are set up there to handle it

[1:44:17] and it will go into that area and then the water will drain directly out into the ocean after it's

[1:44:25] going through the soil.

[1:44:30] The lighting, if you guys take a look at it, it's, it's a

[1:44:35] visible. Those were pictures taken from my property, not somewhere else. Those

[1:44:40] lights shine direct up to 200 feet away. This is a downcast and this is going to

[1:44:47] be the same owner, the same property manager, is going to put lighting a significant

[1:44:53] scale. Is this what their standards are going to be? We might as well do this.

[1:45:00] Put in a drive in out there. At least everybody could watch something from it. So please cancel this vote until you actually get these conditions in writing on paper and a commitment. Otherwise, you're just walking away from your obligation. Thank you.

[1:45:18] Thank you. I would like to invite the developer to speak the applicant.

[1:45:27] Hello, my name is Cosh Graywell, and I'm the applicant for the project.

[1:45:31] The rest of our team is also on Zoom as well.

[1:45:34] And they'd be happy to answer any questions that you guys might have.

[1:45:38] And a lot of the questions citizens of Fort Bragg had as well.

[1:45:43] And if you guys have any questions that I can answer right now, I graciously do that.

[1:45:47] Alex, do you have any questions for the applicant?

[1:45:52] One of the big concerns seems to be height.

[1:45:58] Anyway, you can bring it down.

[1:46:01] I hope you've been through this, if you've seen the numbers.

[1:46:03] I'm sure you have.

[1:46:05] I'd like it explained how it went from 26 to 37.

[1:46:09] And it's in the coastal zone.

[1:46:11] It's clearly a concern for a lot of people being

[1:46:13] to get way to our community.

[1:46:15] And you probably didn't see all the public comments.

[1:46:17] We got quite a few.

[1:46:18] And primarily, a lot of them had to do with the height.

[1:46:22] But if it wasn't that high, you know, you didn't hear a lot of concern.

[1:46:25] There were other concerns, but that seemed to be a big one.

[1:46:27] And for me, it's kind of a big one too.

[1:46:29] So I'm just curious, is there any way?

[1:46:31] You can pencil things out and make it work without taking it up, 37 feet.

[1:46:37] Well, I'll answer it, and then I'll have the rest of our team also answer it.

[1:46:40] The way the project's currently laid out is if we ended up taking away a story that would

[1:46:45] reduce the project size by 33% and then that would not pencil out.

[1:46:51] And the other thing is, since we are going out of higher height, we're also utilizing less land in terms of the footprint of land.

[1:46:59] And since we're utilizing less footprint of land, there's more pervious surface.

[1:47:04] As opposed to when you have a lower height, you have to utilize more space to have the same amount of units.

[1:47:14] Yeah, thank you. So if there's no way you could reduce the units and have it work financially is basically what you're saying you have to have that many units and to keep the soil the groundwater going.

[1:47:23] You figure take it up.

[1:47:25] Yes, sir. And the other thing is is if we like what you were saying if we had the same amount of units and we didn't have the third floor, then there would be less space for parking less space for common open space less space for patios.

[1:47:37] Um, less space for a playground and all that other stuff. So it wouldn't be fees.

[1:47:46] Colleagues to other questions. Councilman Rollinsmith.

[1:47:49] Thanks for being here.

[1:47:52] Um, my questions are about parking and drainage.

[1:47:56] So that's a lot of cars and that's a big parking area.

[1:48:00] And there was a suggestion we moved it to the east side.

[1:48:02] Is that even possible?

[1:48:04] Is do you own the other side or is this something the city is set up or?

[1:48:10] When we're talking about the East side or you're talking about the East side of Highway 1 or

[1:48:14] what are we conversing East side here?

[1:48:17] There was a suggestion.

[1:48:18] Right up to the front of the road and other words, to say having the parking and you go down

[1:48:21] and turn them all in, come in the back, come in the front.

[1:48:24] That's if you're going to North Cliff with an output store.

[1:48:27] Can you move to the parking?

[1:48:28] I think that's what you meant, right?

[1:48:30] Yeah.

[1:48:30] I think that's the comment.

[1:48:32] Yeah, essentially you're saying to put the buildings or the parking currently isn't

[1:48:35] but the parking what buildings are currently.

[1:48:37] If I'm understanding correctly.

[1:48:40] Yeah, we need parking this up is a problem because there's the as the commenter said there's there's the RV park. There's the restaurant. There's the trail. There's all the things that people are going to and that street is really good just it.

[1:48:54] So, I just want to interrupt here and just let you know that the zoning code requires the parking be to the side and behind development of any sort in for frags, so if you want him to have the parking in front of the building, then you would need to approve of variance for that or make it one of the incentives.

[1:49:17] could have to be additional and understand we have additional parking rather than the required.

[1:49:26] So you want to require more parking than is required by this phone as long.

[1:49:31] I do not believe you can do that, but I'll know.

[1:49:33] And further the attorney.

[1:49:35] All right.

[1:49:37] I'm doing the shakehead.

[1:49:38] Can I?

[1:49:39] Excuse me.

[1:49:40] And then related to that drainage.

[1:49:43] Well, this project actually improved drainage for everyone actually in the end, it sounded like a lot of work was going to be done to improve the drainage.

[1:49:56] So we're like all over the map.

[1:49:58] I think you need to direct your questions the applicant now and then direct other questions.

[1:50:02] I'm not sure later the answer.

[1:50:04] So I'll follow up.

[1:50:05] I did want to let folks know that the planner for the applicant would also love to be able to comment on someone's questions.

[1:50:11] So, Mary, we'll train from HR GA as online and she wants to speak about your question.

[1:50:17] Hi, everyone. Yeah, Mary from HR GA. Yeah, so to speak on the parking a little bit.

[1:50:23] I think, you know, I'm hearing obviously some concerns about the height.

[1:50:27] And so, from a planning standpoint, point with the single family homes to the west.

[1:50:33] If we were to move the buildings as far west as possible, we actually would appear taller to those single family homes.

[1:50:40] So part of the planning of this project as long as well as trying to meet, you know zoning codes, it actually is perceived, you know, more at the accurate height level or smaller to residents if they're pushed away. So we have, you know, we have, I don't know the number off the top of my head, but, you know, with, with parking two rows of parking and, you know, we have landscape and a drive out. So you end up with, you know, I'm going to guess 80 feet set back or more from those residents.

[1:51:08] It does help with the overall perception of the height, so that was definitely in consideration.

[1:51:14] And I just worry about efficiency because of the way that the site's kind of triangular.

[1:51:20] You know, would we end up losing parking, which we were trying to maximize.

[1:51:24] Parking as much as possible, so that it's the most efficient layout.

[1:51:29] And then, you know, just trying to provide two access points to that in an event, you know, an emergency or what not.

[1:51:36] So they do have access off the unnamed rowed and herber Avenue.

[1:51:40] So it should have a good flow through the project.

[1:51:44] And I do think Marie mentioned quite a bit of the project

[1:51:48] is actually only the 32 foot height limit.

[1:51:54] So the whole bill, as far as NASA is concerned,

[1:51:57] is like we really are trying to create variation of roof lines.

[1:52:01] And I know you get a lot of rain and Fort Bragg.

[1:52:03] So, only like the very top of, you know, corners or kind of design elements of the buildings will have the 37.8, but majority of the massing is at 32 too.

[1:52:16] And unfortunately, I think like all the reasons cost mentioned, if we were to try to strengthen the building at any point beyond what we've already done, that we would have to take a floor off and I know, you know, we would try to maximize.

[1:52:30] at a two-story level, we just wouldn't be able to fit all the elements. You know, then we would be having a discussion about not having anywhere near enough parking or

[1:52:39] I know you have, yeah, requirements for large patios and all that. So, and I'm happy to answer any more questions that come up specifically about the architecture of the site layout.

[1:52:50] Right, any other questions, colleagues? Well, we have to go.

[1:52:53] Oh, it was just that question about drainage, but I think that that's not a planning element.

[1:52:59] It's more about that, Dr. Ben.

[1:53:01] And I might able to speak.

[1:53:05] Yeah, so Omar is going to speak. He's part of JTS engineering. He's the engineering consultant on the project.

[1:53:12] Yeah, hi. My name's Omar to be in my JTS engineering. So the project, we're meeting anything

[1:53:17] for this project. We had to do a drainage report. That drainage report looked at the entire shed

[1:53:24] and all the water that was going to come in a sort of storm event. So we did a report that was

[1:53:30] about eight pages, which is an entire study about everything. And so basically what we're proposing

[1:53:38] to do number one is that all the water is going to be mitigated on site. There's not going to be any

[1:53:44] enough that's going to go on any street so I understand neighbors are concerned about drainage

[1:53:49] issues, but just know that all the water will be contained on our site.

[1:53:53] And another thing is that our design is actually improving the proposed conditions.

[1:53:58] The existing condition is actually worse than what we're proposing to mitigate and to distribute

[1:54:04] everywhere.

[1:54:05] So to the drain system, I mean so the point being is that I don't think drainage should

[1:54:09] concerned. We have addressed all the points currently. Our dream study still under review

[1:54:15] with the City of Fort Bragg waiting for our final comments from them. But everything on R&D

[1:54:20] has been addressed. We're improving the situation. It's not making worse. Neighbors, we're not

[1:54:25] going to be flooding. There's not going to be any sort of issues on that end. So I just wanted to

[1:54:30] provide that information for you guys. Thank you. Okay. One more question about the lighting.

[1:54:38] It was an issue about the lighting that would be for our architect, I'm sure if I can speak on it, I know you guys have a code requirement, which is very common all over California that it's dark sky compliant and will be shielded.

[1:54:56] So it will make sure that no light is spilled off of the site.

[1:55:01] It will be directed to the parking areas.

[1:55:04] And we submitted a lighting plan that had the photometric.

[1:55:08] So it shows all the lighting levels throughout the site.

[1:55:11] So there should be no light off of our property.

[1:55:17] And does that include our street lights?

[1:55:19] Are we going to put street lights in?

[1:55:23] I don't want no plan for that.

[1:55:24] I don't think there is, I don't know, maybe Marie can speak if there was a condition added.

[1:55:30] We're not showing street lights.

[1:55:31] We're just showing all the parking lot and building lighting at this point.

[1:55:34] But if there is, we would follow the city requirements for street lights.

[1:55:44] We do not have any special conditions requiring street lights as part of this project.

[1:55:49] That area of town does not have street lights.

[1:55:52] Got it. Thank you.

[1:55:55] Any other questions?

[1:55:56] That's why we have that here.

[1:56:00] Thank you so much, be in here.

[1:56:01] And thanks to those of you who are online.

[1:56:03] Thank you.

[1:56:05] All right, I would like to allow anyone else

[1:56:07] in the room to speak.

[1:56:16] Thank you for your time.

[1:56:18] My name is Hammett Sarabi.

[1:56:20] And I've gone through four of these meetings

[1:56:22] so far in regards to this apartment project.

[1:56:26] And we still don't know what is going to happen

[1:56:30] to Harbor Avenue.

[1:56:33] There's things saying that half of it's going to be paid, the other half is going to be left gravel.

[1:56:39] Something mentioning that they might do the whole 50 feet and put a corporate on the palm one side.

[1:56:47] What's it going to be? There's four of us that live on that property on that street.

[1:56:53] We are important. We are going to be really impacted by this project and I'd like to know

[1:57:00] where do I go? Maybe not here, but I would appreciate if someone would tell me where do I go in the city to get a final resolution?

[1:57:09] What is going to happen to Harbor Avenue? Not Simpson Street, not Harbor Drive as is mentioned in this report.

[1:57:17] It's very confusing. I would really appreciate someone telling me where do we go to see the final plan for Harbor Avenue.

[1:57:31] And it's going to look ridiculous. Until this year, I hate to say that City didn't even know Harbor Avenue existed.

[1:57:41] I've been down there in the city twice as two years.

[1:57:46] I have to bring it on Google to say this is Harbor Avenue, that's sad and I was told last

[1:57:53] time I was there that we have no intention of improving that road in the near future or might

[1:58:01] not even happen in the long future because there's only four of you live on that street.

[1:58:07] And now all of a sudden this is going to be a parking lot on my way over here.

[1:58:13] This wasn't even a dinner time yet, the no-name street was completely parked cars on both sides because of the restaurant,

[1:58:24] which does their business, you know, people want to believe it or not, it was full, completely on both sides.

[1:58:31] And now we're going to put another 200 vehicles in that area.

[1:58:35] That's not good decision.

[1:58:39] Parking is very important.

[1:58:41] Before this meeting is over or somebody,

[1:58:45] the city has my email.

[1:58:46] We need to know what is going to happen to harbor avenue.

[1:58:51] A final decision is it going to be paid.

[1:58:53] Is it going to be gravel?

[1:58:54] Is it going to be all paid?

[1:58:57] It's ridiculous.

[1:58:59] It's become a funny issue.

[1:59:02] Thank you.

[1:59:03] Okay, thank you. You want to also learn.

[1:59:08] Hi, and say goodbye to Justin.

[1:59:09] In line with the last commenter, I actually think it's quite important that if this is approved,

[1:59:15] the city require two special conditions that the entire widths of harbor avenue be improved by the applicant.

[1:59:25] It just doesn't make sense to me that that wasn't already recommendation that's pretty normal.

[1:59:32] And anyway, just that, and then I just wanted to make sure, and maybe somebody mentioned this before, but that in special conditions five, it should shouldn't say North Harper drive, you just need to add to it, but I was gone for events, and maybe that was already difficult. So you need to add it to the language to make it correct. Thanks.

[1:59:51] All right. Thank you. Anyone else in the room?

[1:59:59] I'm Mary Jeff.

[2:00:00] Good afternoon, everyone. I live on Harbor Avenue, and I've reached out to you a couple of times, but I have a receipt of response to questions in general.

[2:00:10] And I would really hope a traffic study could be done on the intersection and for us on the harbor, because I'm really concerned. I have teenagers who drive skate like, so that's it. Thank you.

[2:00:26] Good, thank you.

[2:00:28] Anyone else in the room?

[2:00:37] I am Pam Pell, and we live out on Todd's point.

[2:00:47] And it's really wonderful to see that people have maintained Todd's point in such a beautiful way.

[2:00:58] But it's on the tipping point of breaking loose and it's just, it's, there's a lot of traffic on it already.

[2:01:13] So I hate to see that, but once you put that parking in and all of that are people gonna just be, you know,

[2:01:25] using it as their play yard and to some extent, I love people and I don't mind some changes, but I think it's not going to change in a positive way.

[2:01:45] And we love our little space on Todd White and it's we

[2:02:01] just really love it here and would like to really maintain it.

[2:02:08] Thank you.

[2:02:10] All right, thank you.

[2:02:12] Anyone else in there?

[2:02:19] I'd like to see, you know, more housing for everybody.

[2:02:22] But I'm sure in Shaw, the owner of Harbor RV Park, and we've been trying to, since I had to

[2:02:32] repossess it, get things done, PG&E were aving, put a signpost, no parking, and it's taking

[2:02:46] us years and years to get this stuff done. So I can't imagine how this apartment building

[2:02:54] is going to go up so fast. I have one question about law enforcement. Is it going to be

[2:03:00] increased number one? Number two, 4th of July, you guys should all come to Harbor Harve Park

[2:03:08] and try to walk. Just try to walk because of the cars, everybody comes where we don't

[2:03:15] care, we just don't want people intruding in our power or our residents or our guests. So I think

[2:03:27] the amount of buildings that are going up is just way overboard for that area. And it is the

[2:03:36] project problem. So thank you.

[2:03:42] Thank you.

[2:03:44] Anyone else more?

[2:03:53] Hi. When he was healed,

[2:03:54] Strapard and I live on top point.

[2:03:57] One of the things I haven't heard mentioned is the college.

[2:04:00] College has a lot of student activities and

[2:04:05] ingress the Negroes comes out to ocean view.

[2:04:09] So I agree with all the comments.

[2:04:11] It's a really dense, well, very already,

[2:04:14] have a cold, so a little shaky, but I don't think

[2:04:19] you should have proved this project.

[2:04:21] I really don't.

[2:04:23] I think it's way too big.

[2:04:25] I don't quite understand why the height and some parts

[2:04:29] of it impact the number of parking spaces

[2:04:33] that seems not quite clear.

[2:04:37] But anyway, those are my comments.

[2:04:39] Thank you.

[2:04:41] All right.

[2:04:42] Thank you.

[2:04:42] Anyone else?

[2:04:48] I'm so sorry, but you cannot come back to speak again.

[2:04:56] All right.

[2:04:57] So Madam Clerk, anybody on line?

[2:05:01] Please use the raise hand feature for public common item 7A.

[2:05:06] And we have three.

[2:05:13] Andrew Jordan, you have three minutes.

[2:05:19] Am I audible?

[2:05:22] Yes.

[2:05:23] Can you hear me?

[2:05:27] Hello?

[2:05:28] Yes.

[2:05:28] can hear you in there. Thanks. Yeah, I just need to check that there's no way for me to tell.

[2:05:34] Just a couple of issues. I raised this earlier and I appreciate it being addressed by Ms. Jones

[2:05:39] is like the incentive or low income units because it seems to me that there's one number

[2:05:44] when the project is proposed and then there's another one when it is actually finalized and it just

[2:05:51] seems to me that there's a lot of play there that could be exploited by somebody who maybe was wanting

[2:05:58] to take advantage of that gap.

[2:06:04] From what I can hear, and from what I heard previously, this

[2:06:08] is kind of the sausage factory of legislation. There is just a whole lot of issues all

[2:06:13] at once, and there are lots of degrees of knowledge with respect to the particulars of what

[2:06:19] actually goes into creating a project like this when a lot of effort and expenses may

[2:06:26] to accommodate legislation and regulatory authority and what specifically the grounds for denial

[2:06:33] could be for making changes in the like. Some concerns I have are basically pedestrian traffic

[2:06:42] to McDonald's, the boatyard shopping center into the grocery outlet. I think that's going to

[2:06:48] probably be built at some point and so I'm kind of concerned especially with families there with

[2:06:53] children, you can't keep watch on them 24 hours a day and you can't put them on a leash,

[2:06:59] and so with the speed of traffic along highway one main street, I think that might be a concern.

[2:07:08] I think this project is basically the start of not quite gentrification, but a change of the

[2:07:16] of the community because of the size and the character of the apartment buildings here and with regards to the future aspects of possibly converting to condominiums, which might be very attractive.

[2:07:35] It's my hope that the city council will take that into account according to their understanding of the history and the context of the project and the city and the community.

[2:07:46] And I hope that it works for the best because housing isn't issue.

[2:07:50] But one of the reasons why Fort Bragg is attractive is because it's not highly developed.

[2:07:56] Thank you very much.

[2:08:00] Thank you.

[2:08:02] Jenny, you have three minutes?

[2:08:07] Great, Jenny.

[2:08:08] Shedic.

[2:08:09] Um, when Lindy had commented at the very beginning about the bridge traffic in the center lane

[2:08:15] and putting a divider.

[2:08:17] However, I do believe when that bridge was designed after my brother died.

[2:08:21] It was for emergency vehicles to travel down the center of that bridge and continue on both directions

[2:08:26] down the center.

[2:08:28] However, I would love to see a no left hand turn like there was on the north side on all corners.

[2:08:35] of the bridge. So no one was making left-hand turns to cross traffic because it's dangerous.

[2:08:41] Also, cow trans could at the very least move the turn lane signs, which are actually past the turn into the

[2:08:52] RV park and restaurant and are actually like 20 feet before the bridge parallel to the restaurant.

[2:09:00] That's just my main concern is people getting in and out of their safely. Okay, thanks.

[2:09:16] I'm glad that Linda Peters, the mayor and the vice mayor, reviewed the video from the planning commission or some of it.

[2:09:26] I hope you also read all the written comments.

[2:09:29] I know Lindy has been knowledgeable about the hair Creek sites since 1991 and unfortunately the planning commission

[2:09:40] don't have that historic knowledge or probably some of you don't either.

[2:09:48] When you look at the comments there were 10 comments with the planning commission online against the project

[2:09:58] and one for the project. This time around you have 20 written comments against the project and one in favor of the project.

[2:10:12] It seems that so many issues are still not solid.

[2:10:20] There are lots of mistakes and I agree with Mr. Burnett that all this should be clarified

[2:10:30] so that the city council actually knows what they're voting for.

[2:10:35] And many of the issues are delegated to the planning department, like playground or so.

[2:10:47] Mr. Burnett had altogether 13's points that he submitted for the planning commission meeting,

[2:10:57] and they should be included and added to the 37 conditions.

[2:11:03] And when you have that many special conditions, you realize something is really off.

[2:11:12] And to just base the idea that the viewset doesn't matter because the city has a graph where it doesn't show to me is just ridiculous.

[2:11:24] with the auto zone. It was clear that the study had to be done and I submitted that in my written comments.

[2:11:35] The study that was done for the auto zone in terms of the view. They also had a catchment area and I would like to know why that hasn't been addressed.

[2:11:48] This is gross and inducing it's a high-rise development that the gateway to Fort Brake.

[2:11:57] There are many unresolved cumulative impacts.

[2:12:01] It would be presidents setting for the meal site and other developments.

[2:12:06] It's hard enough that we have the hotel that went over size, but that was another story.

[2:12:23] So there are three minutes left.

[2:12:27] Can you any final words or

[2:12:35] any other comment or sound line?

[2:12:36] We have Jane McMarton, we have three minutes.

[2:12:41] Thank you.

[2:12:42] I just wanted to say Marie mentioned,

[2:12:45] because I had mentioned that the planning

[2:12:46] commission about the school bus picked up an MTA,

[2:12:52] and she said she was going to leave it up to them.

[2:12:55] But I feel a new traffic study should be done,

[2:12:59] because it's a different type of traffic.

[2:13:02] There's going to be more cars at certain times,

[2:13:06] more people coming and going to work, dropping, leaving to take kids to school, picking

[2:13:11] kids up, teenagers driving, and I just think the traffic study done for autosone was done

[2:13:19] mostly with traffic between the hours that autosone was going to be open. So I think that's

[2:13:25] your revelant, in this case, where it's a residential, and I really would like to see a new traffic

[2:13:32] study done, and I think you need to think about the public safety and and just do

[2:13:40] another traffic study because things have changed.

[2:13:43] More people are going to the Puma Bluffs, the restaurant was not there, the current restaurant

[2:13:50] was not there, the Nojo River Grill, when the traffic study was done.

[2:13:56] And there's been a lot of changes out there and some additional housing added and so I would

[2:14:00] really encourage you before you approve this to consider that. I also hope you will read all of

[2:14:07] Mr. Clark's comments. I read through them today. I was also on the planning commission

[2:14:12] in 1982 when we did the original general plan. So anyway, thank you for your time and maybe this

[2:14:19] should go back to the drawing board a bit and come back before the city council at a future date.

[2:14:26] And I know the applicant's anxious to get going, but we got to make sure that everything's

[2:14:32] done in the best interest of the community, the residents that live there, the children

[2:14:37] that are going to live there, and the people that are going to go out and look at the

[2:14:44] bluffs and visit the restaurants and stuff.

[2:14:48] So anyway, thank you.

[2:14:51] Thank you.

[2:14:52] Thank you.

[2:14:52] Any other comments?

[2:14:52] more. Please use the raise hand feature for public comment on item 7A.

[2:15:00] There are no hands.

[2:15:04] All right. And I think I will conclude the public hearing, unless our attorney has something to add. It will be appropriate to allow the applicant to respond to this point and share with, like, absolutely.

[2:15:13] Do you like Mr. Brody, have anything to add?

[2:15:19] I would have nothing else to add. And then, unless someone else from our team would like to add anything.

[2:15:26] Anyone from the team online? Have anything to add?

[2:15:30] I don't think I have anything to add, either this is Mary again from HJ, but I'm happy to answer if there's any more questions that you cancel have.

[2:15:44] All right, then with that, I will close the public hearing. It is eight, sixteen.

[2:15:50] I'd be a good time for a break.

[2:15:52] Wow, Council member Peter, so I was just about to ask colleagues.

[2:15:55] I think felt that this was appropriate time for a break.

[2:15:57] Thank you.

[2:15:58] You beat me to it.

[2:15:59] Yes, we will take a seven minute break.

[2:16:02] seven of right we'll be back here at twenty four eight twenty four

[2:28:24] if there

[2:28:27] were not enough public co-berness or input at the beginning of this way

[2:28:33] back in September now they're aware and now they have better ideas rather

[2:28:39] than saying no to this project is there any way we can go back and accept the

[2:28:46] look input and see if there are some changes that would make the residents, the neighbors,

[2:28:53] the neighbors, in particular, work out all those things that they think are a significant

[2:29:01] impact to them. At this point, can we do that?

[2:29:06] Well, I'm sorry that question is too vague for me to answer, because all of the concerns

[2:29:12] of all the neighbors. I have no idea how to graph my mind around what that actually means.

[2:29:19] Well, I just in this room, I've heard, you know, though, you know, that they didn't hear about it

[2:29:25] in time, whatever, whatever the reasons are. And the time has passed for them to have a serious

[2:29:32] input. And now we're at the time of approval or just, and we can't disapprove it. We're told where

[2:29:39] can't disapprove it, unless there's a significant unmitigated impact, is that right?

[2:29:44] A significant, unmitigatable impact to health or safety, right?

[2:29:50] So, we have to approve it.

[2:29:54] Unless we say we find that there's unmitigated significant impact too.

[2:30:01] It's a little more than you have to find it. We actually have to have evidence in the record of that unmitigatable impact to health and safety to do any kind of denial. In terms of addressing concerns of the residents in September.

[2:30:23] you know the inclusionary housing ordinance was passed in 2009. Since that time we have not had one

[2:30:33] project not one that was more than seven units in the city of Fort Bragg. So it has never been used

[2:30:40] until now. The inclusionary housing ordinance had the unintended consequence of resulting in

[2:30:47] big density bonus requirement that the city is obligated to embrace.

[2:30:56] You know the applicant came to the city with a 56 unit project that he was quite happy with.

[2:31:02] And then the inclusionary housing ordinance made him go through a process where he had to redesign

[2:31:07] his project.

[2:31:10] So you kind of can't go back in time unless you want to go to all my

[2:31:17] back to 2009, get rid of the inclusionary housing ordinance, but that would be all different story.

[2:31:25] My own feeling about this is there was a hearing notice for that, which is a normal,

[2:31:32] that is what's required by the code. We're not required to notify the neighbors for that three

[2:31:38] application hearing around incentives.

[2:31:45] You know, at the end of the day, three of you need to decide

[2:31:48] one way or maybe two, only two. I don't know.

[2:31:54] If there are specific concerns that you heard

[2:31:57] that you feel are not addressed by the special conditions, I think a better mechanism to address

[2:32:02] those would be to voice those now and help and give me some time to craft some special

[2:32:08] conditions to address those specific concerns. Well, that would be ideal. I don't want to go back

[2:32:17] the drawing board. I think the the setback idea of the the tilted roof that goes over to

[2:32:27] through story is actually I hate to say this, but I'm okay with that because I've seen that before

[2:32:33] and actually it won't be any higher than the grocery outlet, not the grocery outlet, the

[2:32:39] let's not as you said. So we're already okay with that. And they're far enough apart,

[2:32:47] the buildings are far enough apart. So it isn't like a huge density. But there's issues

[2:32:52] about which side the parking lot should be on. And there's reasons for that, I guess.

[2:32:58] But it just would be great to be able to do one more work shop to see if there

[2:33:04] any adjustments that we can make that would satisfy the neighbors. I don't think we're going

[2:33:12] to make everybody happy, but maybe there is something we could do. I'm just asking.

[2:33:20] I don't feel qualified to answer the question of what would satisfy the neighbors.

[2:33:26] I understood. That's one of the questions we had from the commenter at the podium was

[2:33:36] what's going to happen to Harbor Avenue? And I want to make sure I understand a special condition

[2:33:41] of 22 talks about Harbor Avenue should be improved as follows. Prior to the final of the building

[2:33:48] permit, Harbor Avenue should be improved along the length of the parcel frontage, including a 50

[2:33:53] foot fully paved the right away and a parking lane. Upon a proven to this section, prior to the final

[2:34:00] of the building permit, the paved portion of the street should be dedicated to the city.

[2:34:05] installation of sidewalk, curb, corner stamps, gutter, and conformed paving along the

[2:34:13] frontage project, along the project, frontage on the west side of frontage road.

[2:34:18] So that's the one closer to highway one, west side of that one, sidewalks, and the

[2:34:24] east side of harbor, or the, yes, the east side of harbor drive.

[2:34:29] So that leaves the west side of Harbor Avenue, I'm sorry, a lot of harbors around here, streets anyway, named after them.

[2:34:39] That leaves that unpaid at this time as part of one of these conditions.

[2:34:44] You had a question about that, what's it going to look like? That's what's being proposed.

[2:34:48] Now you know what it's going to look like if we approve this.

[2:34:52] I think I was correct in assessing that and reading the condition.

[2:34:58] We can't go back, I know that, this is one of the more difficult decisions, this is

[2:35:06] where it's such a high-paid position sitting here.

[2:35:11] First of all, I think we need housing, there's no question about it, maybe it was ambitious

[2:35:18] to try and create 200 units of housing as a goal, the City Council back in 2018, and I think

[2:35:26] If we okay this project, we're going to be really close to hitting that target.

[2:35:33] The problem if we deny this project is what's it going to say to other developers who

[2:35:38] come to Fort Bragg and want to create housing projects?

[2:35:42] We got one real estate person out there that's seen a few projects get denied including the

[2:35:46] autos on the same location.

[2:35:51] That had to do with a whole bunch of other issues, including, you know, franchise agreements and all that with a not agreements on, um,

[2:36:00] as this big box franchise stores.

[2:36:04] But in this case, it's housing that we're talking about.

[2:36:07] I know that the gateway to Fort Bragg, I was also on the council when we okay, the the Chillino apartments on John Timilino Drive.

[2:36:15] I don't know that that's what they're called.

[2:36:17] We heard the same argument then that that is going to be

[2:36:20] the gateway to town coming from the north.

[2:36:22] And that's not a good look.

[2:36:24] And really, I don't know if you really can see them that well.

[2:36:28] But, you know, they seem to blend in, OK,

[2:36:30] I don't think coming from the north for Prague looks OK,

[2:36:33] as you come in.

[2:36:33] I know there's Denny's there, but.

[2:36:38] So I don't think it's a problem with a gateway from the south.

[2:36:41] I really don't.

[2:36:43] I also noted I don't like the height of the building. I mentioned that. I'm still not happy with it, but I understand the constraints that the developer was put under and you have to understand the constraints that we are under with the new state law.

[2:36:57] But I also noted when I was there on Sunday that there are trees and I check with the applicant during the break there are some trees on the north west corner near the outlet store.

[2:37:11] storehouse area. They're pretty tall. And in fact, are taller than 32 feet. I'm sure. And

[2:37:18] we'll remain on the property. They're not going to cut them down. So there will be a visual,

[2:37:22] a nature visual that's higher than the proposed buildings.

[2:37:28] I'm not sure. I think the parking

[2:37:32] is okay where it is. I get why it needs to be there. And I think it would be better served for

[2:37:39] everybody circulation wise and the people that live there already before this project

[2:37:43] if in fact it is okay okay I think the traffic seems to be okay and I know there's

[2:37:51] going to be more cars and we heard our consultant Marie Jones tell us that the level

[2:37:57] of service and traffic studies aren't that important anymore. They weren't at one time but

[2:38:03] they don't seem to be that important because the big push here in the state of California is

[2:38:07] housing, housing, housing housing. And we've got a piece of property with a developer that has

[2:38:13] put forth a plan, has hired all the necessary experts, engineers, architects to put this thing

[2:38:19] together, put a lot of money and do it already, and it's going to provide some housing for the city

[2:38:24] for a brag. And one final note is that the College of the Red Wishes brought up right at the end.

[2:38:30] And I was thinking of it, I had it written down in my notes. One of the things we'd like to see

[2:38:35] is the college build, a bigger college, a better college, more courses, a nursing program,

[2:38:42] a marine environment program, all sorts of great programs. Where are these students going to live?

[2:38:48] This is an opportunity for some housing or the students right here, very close to the college.

[2:38:55] So for a number of reasons that it's kind of going like this for me, the one advantage I feel

[2:39:01] If we okay this project and remember it's going to take three votes to do so, is that the people that live in the area that are against or oppose this project can take their case to the Coastal Commission, who will then have the final say, and this being in the Coastal zone, I really think that it's probably the best way for this decision to go tonight.

[2:39:22] If we say no, that's the end of it.

[2:39:25] If two of us say no, and it's a two-two vote, that's the end of this project.

[2:39:29] You need to have to come back with a new project.

[2:39:34] Or, you know, like I said, what sort of message does this bring to others?

[2:39:41] So I'm conflicted to be honest.

[2:39:43] But right now, I'm leading to support it.

[2:39:45] Only because there is a venue for those opposed to take it further,

[2:39:49] paying the cost of commission. So with this point, all the reasons I stated, I think I

[2:39:53] support it. It's a tough one. No, it's very difficult.

[2:39:57] Vice Mayor, you like that way, and.

[2:40:05] Solar, did I see solar? Yeah, the state of California is building code now requires solar

[2:40:12] for multi-family projects. So that will be they'll be on the building rooftops as part of the building

[2:40:20] performance date. Okay, I'm gonna sit there. Okay, feel

[2:40:29] free to discuss. Okay, I heard from the neighbors in the audience also, change.

[2:40:39] People in the small town do not like change, but we can't keep on going with no change.

[2:40:49] because they say it's not why it moved care. It's not why it moved care. But as locals we we want to keep our families

[2:40:57] every want to keep our kids here. And we want to see for Brad Grod some extent, but not San Francisco or

[2:41:07] not LA. We we need growth to maintain our families here, not to retire here.

[2:41:16] And this is

[2:41:18] Three stories, this is a big change before Bragg.

[2:41:23] This is opening doors for others, other developers.

[2:41:27] Just like Rochialet.

[2:41:31] Or for my kids, well, my kids are old enough.

[2:41:37] Maybe my great niece and nephews, they can go to school here

[2:41:41] and make a career here would change.

[2:41:44] Not just retire.

[2:41:47] I remember when I was younger in my early 20s, we have the best view, well my family did

[2:41:54] has the best view and I would look across the bay, I'd see two or three lights over on

[2:42:01] Todd's point.

[2:42:03] One day I look up, it's all lit up with houses and now everyone says, oh, we like open space,

[2:42:14] ocean view until they want that ocean view for themselves. And that's not,

[2:42:26] that's not right.

[2:42:28] And so we all need to work together. Some people are going to be happy.

[2:42:34] Can't make everybody happy here. We're all have different views and everything.

[2:42:39] And I get it changes hard, but being on the council and looking at the future for my kids and my great nephews and stuff, but hopefully we can see them one day staying here instead of moving away and then coming back in the car, they can stay.

[2:43:01] So, I am for the project for housing and it's not any taller than the outlet building

[2:43:10] that's already there.

[2:43:14] And the planning commission, a great group of people on there that go with the code, the building

[2:43:23] design, the look, the study, the landscaping, everything they read it to the G and they go

[2:43:33] by our coats and everything. And so that the aesthetic and everything that should lend

[2:43:44] into our town, this new development. So I am for the development as we need housing and

[2:43:53] like Council Member Linny Peter said,

[2:43:56] if the neighbors can take it to the,

[2:44:01] also commission, because we are too far ahead

[2:44:05] to turn back now, so I'm for the project.

[2:44:10] All right, thanks so much.

[2:44:13] I certainly sympathize with a lot of the concerns

[2:44:15] that were voiced today, mostly by folks

[2:44:18] in the vicinity. Honestly, for me, it's pretty uncomplicated in the sense that while we do need

[2:44:27] to keep those concerns in mind, our job is to think of the needs of our entire community and

[2:44:33] those are very strongly in favor of building housing. And I think this is a rare opportunity. I think

[2:44:40] Marie, you addressed how rare it actually is to have something like this. And if our goal over

[2:44:48] seven year period is 200 units, this is formidable and having a real impact.

[2:44:53] A substantive impact on the housing needs of our community.

[2:44:58] It's a kind of housing that is both...

[2:45:00] More environmentally friendly, and in terms of its scale, in terms of the market is going to be more

[2:45:07] tend to be more affordable. So it's not just the affordable units, it's also the nature of the housing,

[2:45:12] it's going to be more for our working families and those are folks we need to keep in mind.

[2:45:20] So having heard all the concerns with whether it be traffic or or a stormwater, I thank you,

[2:45:27] as Jones were, I feel like you've been very responsive

[2:45:30] to a lot of those things.

[2:45:32] It's not like, as you said, you can't address

[2:45:33] everybody's concerns perfectly.

[2:45:36] And certainly not everyone would be happy with this project,

[2:45:39] but I think that it is an unusual opportunity

[2:45:42] for the community in general.

[2:45:44] And so I've very much favorite.

[2:45:53] Okay, well, brings us to.

[2:45:56] Yeah, what did you want to say?

[2:45:58] Sounds like not relevant to anything to add to this.

[2:46:00] You didn't have to speak.

[2:46:05] We're able to add things, you know, conditions, so one of them I would like to see the sidewalks.

[2:46:12] I'm just one, everybody else has to agree.

[2:46:15] So I'm not trying to say everybody should do what I ask.

[2:46:18] Can you be more descriptive about sidewalks?

[2:46:20] The project would already include sidewalks on both the east and west side of the parcel.

[2:46:25] Take what curb and gutter to what sidewalks are you looking for beyond that?

[2:46:33] All the way to ocean view?

[2:46:37] There are already our sidewalks on the part that's to ocean view that is already developed.

[2:46:44] So sidewalks have already been developed as part of the dolphin in,

[2:46:48] so it would continue those sidewalks to the northern first-of-boundary of the project site.

[2:46:55] Well I can't speak for the neighbors. I don't know if they want sidewalks all the way up

[2:46:59] or they want to keep the rural nature. Personally, I would like to see sidewalks because

[2:47:06] it's a lot easier to work on over there. But I can't, I don't know what the neighbors want.

[2:47:13] So I'm not going to go there.

[2:47:17] And I would like to be sensitive to speeding along the highway

[2:47:21] because we have now a huge amount of people on the street so then our city can add speed bumps

[2:47:27] or whatever as necessary but that is something the developer needs to worry about.

[2:47:34] So we can't add speed bumps on Highway 1. That is CalTrans's purview.

[2:47:41] On the actual Harbor Drive. You could ask the first speed bump to be put on Harbor Avenue

[2:47:49] because the applicant is going to do those improvements.

[2:47:56] Well, I wanted to wait to see if it's a problem.

[2:47:58] So, is that that would be something we would do, wouldn't that later?

[2:48:03] You could do it after the fact later, or you could actually add a special condition now

[2:48:08] to this project that requires a speed bump to be installed now if you want.

[2:48:13] Okay. I would like to add a special condition subject to approval of the rest of the council

[2:48:19] That developer will install speed bumps if we determine that speeding is an issue on that's harbor avenue.

[2:48:33] I don't know.

[2:48:34] I thought most of their concerns were the speeding was going out to that's point.

[2:48:39] Make it a right and we'd be lined at the end out there to put on a plan.

[2:48:42] Not necessarily where are these departments are going to be.

[2:48:45] I'm thinking in the future when this development goes in.

[2:48:49] But I, you're right, but I don't see. I, I, I don't have a condition.

[2:48:55] You don't, okay, this is if it's becomes problem.

[2:48:59] Well, the dresser, if it does, I don't think it needs a condition.

[2:49:02] But you can, you can look for others.

[2:49:04] This is a life that we need to pay for it.

[2:49:06] I know, but I just don't think that's going to be an issue.

[2:49:08] It's pretty short drive from the apartment egress to the street there.

[2:49:13] You're not going to have a lot of time to build up speed.

[2:49:15] That other road I get at the totally, but anyway, that's just, we're just, you know, this is discussion here.

[2:49:21] Delineration at the council level. I'm not trying to get this one person.

[2:49:26] And otherwise, we have to make the best of it. I don't see us having any decision making really in this,

[2:49:34] unless we're able to prove that there is a substantial unmitigated impact to health or safety.

[2:49:41] So, I have nothing for that, so I'll have to look for good as well.

[2:49:49] So, before you guys make a motion, I'd like you to consider whether or not you want to

[2:49:57] move the one incentive for the storm drain improvement on ocean drive to a special condition

[2:50:02] and give the applicant an incentive to reduce their balconies or not.

[2:50:09] Affirmative.

[2:50:10] affirmative, affirmative. Okay, so I have got all positive, affirmative on that. And then if you don't mind, I'd like to share my screen.

[2:50:22] So that you can look through the issue about Harbor Avenue, because there was a little bit of confusion about Harbor Avenue.

[2:50:32] So, at the Planning Commission hearing, some of the neighbors expressed concern about

[2:50:38] there being parking, a parking lane on the west side of Harvard Avenue, in other words,

[2:50:45] adjacent to their parcels, and they were concerned about that because they were concerned

[2:50:49] about a lot of cars parking in front of their phones.

[2:50:53] And they wanted signs that say no parking.

[2:50:56] Well, the city doesn't really do that.

[2:50:59] we don't like tell people they can't park on public streets.

[2:51:04] You can pave something for safety,

[2:51:08] or you can put a blue thing out if you're ADA,

[2:51:11] but we don't generally say people you can't park somewhere.

[2:51:14] So at that hearing, Shantel recommended

[2:51:18] that instead this second bit be added,

[2:51:23] that the parking lane on the west side of Farber Drive

[2:51:26] shall either be unimproved or developed

[2:51:28] with a stormwater swell for the specifications of the Department of Public Works to encourage infiltration

[2:51:34] of stormwater and discourage public parking on the west side of the road. So that's what

[2:51:39] got added in because that was added the dimensions for the right of way improvements there

[2:51:44] went from 50 feet to 37 feet. So that's that little piece and then the other piece that changes in

[2:51:53] resolution is by the eliminated this requirement, the 150 square foot balconies. I fixed the

[2:52:03] R-Carber app thing that Jacob pointed out. This now includes the other incentives, so the minimum

[2:52:12] balcony size, and then the last thing that it includes is that moving the improvements of ocean

[2:52:23] drive that storm drain to a special condition. So I just want to make sure you're fully aware

[2:52:28] of what you're running for. Those are all running. So they're all running and I'm showing them to

[2:52:34] you live on live TV.

[2:52:46] And with that if someone wants to make the motion, unless anybody wants to add

[2:52:50] another special condition, just make it as amended at the city council hearing. But if you make the motion,

[2:53:00] You don't have to say as amended or do you with to include the red ink or is the red ink now part of the motion that you're making head.

[2:53:08] I think you just say as amended.

[2:53:10] As amended. Okay, that's what I.

[2:53:11] I think that's good.

[2:53:13] Right.

[2:53:13] Is there any more discussion on this?

[2:53:18] Okay.

[2:53:19] I'll go ahead then and make a motion.

[2:53:22] Then we adopt the resolution of the four-pray City Council approving the Coastal Development

[2:53:26] permit 8-24 CDPH-24, design review 11-24, use permit 9-24, and sign permit 20-24, project

[2:53:41] and associated infrastructure at 1151 South Main Street for an 87 unit project, subject

[2:53:49] to the findings and all standard and special conditions here, including the amended conditions

[2:53:55] in redic. Second. I don't think we have a first by council member Peter's second by the

[2:54:04] vice mayor. Peter's? Yes. I'll then Smith. Yes.

[2:54:10] Good. Good. Good. Yes. I want to thank our planning commission too. They had a really

[2:54:17] longer hearing than this with more information and testimony and where we thank you so much for

[2:54:23] all your work on this and making it fairly clear to us what lab before us here tonight. Not an easy

[2:54:29] decision at least for me. Thank you. Yeah, I'd like to reiterate my thanks to the planning

[2:54:34] commission. They were really diligent in their work on this.

[2:54:41] Okay,

[2:54:47] we wait a second for our

[2:54:49] fifth or

[2:54:58] just waiting a moment for our recused member to return.

[2:55:05] So the bucket to call. There we comes.

[2:55:12] All right. With the return of council member,

[2:55:17] We'll move to item 7B.

[2:55:25] All right, colleagues, we're ready.

[2:55:27] Receiver report, hold a public hearing.

[2:55:29] Receive planning commissions recommendation and introduced by title only and wave the first reading of ordinances.

[2:55:35] Number one, ordinance 109-2025,

[2:55:38] remaining the coastal land use and development coach after 17.36,

[2:55:43] parking and loading to one match the changes that have already been approved for the inland land use and development code.

[2:55:50] by City Council and to address inconsistencies in landscaping requirements for parking lots.

[2:55:57] And also to ordinance 182825, amending the inland land use code, the inland land use

[2:56:05] and development code, chapter 1836, parking and loading to address inconsistencies and landscaping

[2:56:12] requirements for parking lots, sequence option 15, 0, 6, 1, B, and 3. Miss Jones, are you back for this one?

[2:56:23] I am sorry. Very in fact. Yeah, again, along with all those consent calendar items,

[2:56:28] it was a busy time for me. So this is something that's coming back to you as part of your strategic plan

[2:56:36] for 200 plus new housing units and your pro housing

[2:56:41] birds.

[2:56:44] You initially directed myself and city staff to pull together an ordinance to eliminate

[2:56:51] minimum parking requirements. We took that forward to the planning commission on January 31st

[2:56:57] and they actually directed staff to continue hearing and return with a revised ordinance

[2:57:02] that did not eliminate parking requirements.

[2:57:05] There was a typo in the staff report.

[2:57:08] So their recommendation was definitely not

[2:57:10] to eliminate minimum parking requirements.

[2:57:12] And at the subsequent meeting, thanks to Jacob Patterson,

[2:57:17] who's so diligent.

[2:57:19] We did determine that the maximum two pro housing points

[2:57:23] could also be earned if the city just revised.

[2:57:26] It's a parking requirement

[2:57:27] so that they meet the minimum requirements of state density.

[2:57:30] bonus file which you were now very familiar with. And then I also went back and looked at the

[2:57:37] pro housing regulations and identified a couple of other choice, pro housing points that the

[2:57:46] city could qualify for without any new effort. And that is 2D to establish a for many projects

[2:57:53] that takes less than four months to complete, which is now possible with the four leaf building

[2:57:59] permit review process. And the same is true of establishing the one stop permit processing. A single point of contact because people would no longer need to go to the county for their building permits.

[2:58:12] And then another easy point to get would be a document in the practice.

[2:58:16] a publicly posting status updates on Project Hermit of Proofles on the Internet, which is actually now required by state law anyway.

[2:58:25] So that's a freebie.

[2:58:27] So with those additional points and the parking standards, it's possible for the city to basically achieve all very required points.

[2:58:38] The Planning Commission also says that it's expressed great reservations about the city establishing a ministerial approval process for multi-family and mixed east housing, which I'll speak a little bit to later.

[2:58:52] And part of the reason I'm bringing that forward at this time as well to get direction is there are

[2:58:57] secret issues associated with changing multi-family from a use permit to a ministerial process

[2:59:02] that would actually make that zoning amendment a fairly significant secret exercise for me

[2:59:10] and I don't want to undertake it unless you're quite certain that's where you want to go.

[2:59:15] So on page three of the staff report, there's a little table that compares density bonus

[2:59:21] while parking requirements with the current IL-UDC parking

[2:59:25] requirements for multi-family.

[2:59:27] And you will note from that table that studios and one bedrooms

[2:59:30] for both sets of requirements.

[2:59:32] There's one space per unit.

[2:59:34] For two to three bedrooms, the density bonus law requires

[2:59:38] 1.5 spaces per unit, whereas our ordinance requires two spaces

[2:59:42] per unit, so there's a difference of a 0.5 space.

[2:59:45] But then if you go four plus bedrooms,

[2:59:47] density bonus law requires two and a half spaces

[2:59:49] and the city requires just two spaces. So, as I noted already, any project of over seven units

[2:59:57] because you do have an inclusionary housing and ordinance.

[3:00:00] In the city of Fort Bragg, would require compliance with density bonus loss. So this change in partner requirements would really only impact those projects that are between three and seven units or three and six units. So I did a little hypothetical seven unit project on page four of my staff report that showed density bonus law basically requiring nine spaces and our current ordinance requiring ten spaces.

[3:00:24] And that would be a project that had a hypothetical two studios, three two bedrooms, and one four bedroom.

[3:00:30] So not an appreciable difference, especially at that small scale of development.

[3:00:37] So I recommend, and the planning commission recommends that you dropped the attached ordinances,

[3:00:43] that include density bonus file parking minimums rather than eliminate parking minimums in their entirety.

[3:00:48] And I think this is important for a couple of reasons, certainly this project that we just reviewed showed the extreme community concern around parking and that does still exist.

[3:01:00] For a break does, as well as incredibly walkable, it really does lack robust transit system.

[3:01:07] And at the end of the day, you'd still get your full two row housing bonus points going this route.

[3:01:14] So then the other question before you tonight is whether or not you should continue to pursue this idea of eliminating the use permit requirement for multi-family housing projects.

[3:01:26] And on page 4, I mentioned four good reasons to keep the use permit process.

[3:01:32] One is it allows neighbors to express their concerns in a public setting and possibly

[3:01:37] have them address through a special condition process.

[3:01:41] Second, it requires any staff to refer projects to appropriate agencies to get comments,

[3:01:46] which can often identify issues that should be resolved to the special conditions.

[3:01:50] Third, it supports staff time to review very complex projects.

[3:01:55] This project was probably the most complex project for one of the top five that I've ever reviewed in the city of Fort Bragg.

[3:02:05] And it took a fair amount of time and taking it out of the use permit process.

[3:02:09] Basically there would be no developer deposit account to fund staff time to do that review.

[3:02:16] And I do have to say that the process of writing it down and thinking it through is very different from looking at a set of plans.

[3:02:25] It's a much more thorough process and I really think you kind of do want that for larger multi family projects and finally the public hearing allows the applicant the opportunity to urge the planning commissioner of the city council to change a special condition that they might find particularly oner is so for all those reasons, I think you might consider retaining that use permit process and with that the planning commission has a set of recommendations on page five in order to meet the 30

[3:02:53] for housing points, do the one stop shop permitting, which are already doing the four months to complete

[3:02:59] entitlement, which are already doing the posting, the status update thing, the two points from

[3:03:05] parking and then replacing the subjective development to the science standards with the objective

[3:03:10] development and the science standards, which is already far by state law anyway.

[3:03:15] And with that, I am tired and stop talking and listening to the questions.

[3:03:24] So we could, we could, in effect, do away with the permit process and the hearing, the public hearing and all that in the permit process, did I?

[3:03:35] You could and previously you had directed myself and staff to come up with an ordinance to do that.

[3:03:43] The actual ordinance change is very simple. It's just in the land use table. You change it from use permit to permit it.

[3:03:49] But in order to make that change, I would actually need to look at the

[3:03:53] Sequo implications of developing multi-family projects on all the vacant

[3:03:57] parcels in Fort Bragg. So it's a non-trivial, trivial,

[3:04:02] sequo-exercise in order to get you to the place where you

[3:04:06] they're pre-entiled in other words for development. And I didn't want to go

[3:04:10] through that work without making sure that that's really what you want,

[3:04:14] especially given what you participated in tonight.

[3:04:17] Well, I know it's a question time, but I wouldn't agree with that for the reasons you stated

[3:04:24] you gave four good ones, but anyway, oh wait,

[3:04:30] other questions, colleagues,

[3:04:37] I don't think

[3:04:37] I have a question right now looking forward to hearing from the public also, but I do want

[3:04:42] to say that I appreciate the feedback from planning commission and also just obviously you

[3:04:46] looking at this as you're working through the whole process, what the implications are.

[3:04:50] It was very informative, yeah, all right.

[3:04:55] There are no other questions.

[3:04:57] We will open the public hearing at 906.

[3:05:01] Anyone in the room like to speak on this item?

[3:05:04] Item, seven B. Seeing none.

[3:05:09] Anyone online?

[3:05:13] Please use the raise hand feature.

[3:05:14] If you would like to make a public comment on seven B

[3:05:20] and there are no hands.

[3:05:25] And that case I will close the public hearing 9.06.

[3:05:33] Is that literally the same time?

[3:05:36] That's the first for me.

[3:05:38] Bring it back to council then for further discussion or questions.

[3:05:55] I think we'll have to make a motion.

[3:05:57] We adopt the resolution of the Fort Bragg Planning Commission.

[3:05:59] Recommending that the city council, A,

[3:06:03] adopt an ordinance of many divisions 17 and the Fort Bragg Municipal Code.

[3:06:06] If you want to read this one, Baron, you're actually reading the wrong resolution because I didn't

[3:06:11] think that was right.

[3:06:13] If you're reading the planning commissions resolution, you're actually wanting to adopt the

[3:06:23] ordinance.

[3:06:24] The ordinance.

[3:06:25] So attachment to an attachment three or the two ordinances.

[3:06:29] And if you want to see the City Council on the first page, I just wish the wrong

[3:06:37] went to the wrong page.

[3:06:43] So all I have to do is read the title of the ordinance. I don't

[3:06:46] have to go through anything else, right? On the on the staff report, if you do the city council

[3:06:52] action, basically, that'll make the motion. Yeah. You have two ordinances and then you need to

[3:06:58] give me direction about the youth permit thing.

[3:07:05] So this is an ordinance of many divisions 17 of the

[3:07:15] I make a motion we adopt an ordinance, many Division 17 of the Fort Bragg municipal code, to amend chapter 17.36 parking and loading, to one, modify minimum parking requirements for multi-family housing, and to amend the parking regulation of the CLUDC to match changes already approved, for the inland, the LUDC, by the City Council, and three,

[3:07:43] men's chapter 17.35 landscaping standards to address inconsistencies in landscaping requirements for parking lots.

[3:07:52] My second then.

[3:07:55] Right for number one.

[3:07:56] We have a first by council member Peter's and a second by council member Alvin Smith.

[3:08:01] Peter's.

[3:08:02] It's only a 22 page ordinance by the way.

[3:08:05] Yes.

[3:08:06] Okay.

[3:08:07] Yes.

[3:08:08] Alvin Smith.

[3:08:09] Raffman.

[3:08:10] Go deck.

[3:08:11] Yes.

[3:08:11] I'm going to do 18.

[3:08:14] Number two.

[3:08:15] I move that.

[3:08:17] The city of Fort Bragadop.

[3:08:19] The ordinance amending division 18 of the Fort Bragadop.

[3:08:24] Municipal Code.

[3:08:27] ILU DC-1-25.

[3:08:30] To amend chapter 18.36.

[3:08:33] Parking and loading.

[3:08:35] To one.

[3:08:36] Reduce minimum parking requirements for multi-family housing.

[3:08:39] And two, amend chapter 18.35, landscaping standards to address inconsistencies in landscaping

[3:08:52] requirements for purview lots.

[3:08:56] By title only, waving for the reading.

[3:09:01] Sagan.

[3:09:02] By title, so it's adopting by title only, and waving for the reading of your notes.

[3:09:06] Correct.

[3:09:07] my I move that we adopt by title only and waving further reading of the ordinance. So you

[3:09:18] read the title, you don't have to read the rest of the 20, but I'll see what I did.

[3:09:25] Okay, we have

[3:09:25] a first by council member Alvin Smith, second by the vice mayor. Leaders? Yes.

[3:09:30] Bucket? Yes. Alvin Smith? Yes.

[3:09:35] Yes, right, and then finally we need to provide some direction and by I feel like I want to make a motion about that.

[3:09:51] I don't know the we need in motion. I just like head nods or nose.

[3:09:58] There we go. We could do a thumbs up if we thumbs up if you think let's keep use permits for multi family.

[3:10:05] Keep, keep, thumbs up means keep use permits.

[3:10:08] Keep use permits, keep use permits, keep use permits.

[3:10:11] For keeping use permits.

[3:10:14] Okay.

[3:10:14] So I got four thumbs up.

[3:10:17] That's all I need.

[3:10:18] Thank you.

[3:10:20] It makes my life easier, I appreciate it.

[3:10:24] Yeah.

[3:10:25] That's okay.

[3:10:33] That gets us to conduct a business item 8A presentation by NHA advisors on the broad

[3:10:41] and financing plan and request city council direction.

[3:10:45] Surveillance.

[3:10:46] Yes.

[3:10:47] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:10:48] One of the click is sharing the screen.

[3:10:50] I want to introduce Eric Scriven of NHA advisors.

[3:10:54] But just to step back a little bit.

[3:10:58] We've been tasked to look in for the financing gap here.

[3:11:03] Previously, it was 3.5 million.

[3:11:06] That has increased to 7.8.

[3:11:10] you to some of the bits that came in that you approved at the previous meeting contingent

[3:11:17] on identifying funded. So we've together an Eric's going to go through this to the banks

[3:11:25] that we're recommending with the interest rate and the finance in cost. He'll also go over the

[3:11:32] of Phoma and how that animal debt payment is built in to the business model.

[3:11:39] So with that Eric, please,

[3:11:43] good evening,

[3:11:48] good evening Mayor, members of the council.

[3:11:52] I just stole my thunder or I guess the takeaway here, which is when the bids were opened,

[3:11:57] we're about two and a half three million dollars higher than what we were discussing back

[3:12:02] in November, November, we were going to go out.

[3:12:07] We were given direction to go out and find money

[3:12:10] for approximately $4.5 million gap.

[3:12:14] And that number changed.

[3:12:16] I think it was last month.

[3:12:18] The number instead is about seven and a half million

[3:12:21] if you ever take depend on the structure

[3:12:23] that we end up deciding as the best for the transaction

[3:12:29] of Council will decide to move forward with this.

[3:12:31] So the goals were of course low interest rate, flexible terms for pre-paying at the time we thought we needed a more expeditious closing schedule.

[3:12:44] And I think the direction that was given that was a very important piece that we went out very strongly was reducing or eliminating if possible.

[3:12:55] the city's general fund as a backstop to this enterprise transaction.

[3:13:05] So, in the last several weeks since the Bids were open for the project, I think that

[3:13:13] was in February,

[3:13:17] with that number in hand and a lot of work that had been done in the previous

[3:13:23] several months on the pro-forma we went out and saw the city bank bank bids.

[3:13:30] I mean just go back. This is sort of the background. I don't know that we really need to discuss why.

[3:13:37] The city of Fort Bragg wants to do this. It's been discussed quite a bit.

[3:13:43] Quite honestly I'm very excited to be part of this project myself.

[3:13:50] The high level is the project costs are now 17.8 million.

[3:13:57] I think that's in addition.

[3:13:59] It's a little higher than what the Bids were, which was 17.3.

[3:14:02] So there's some other costs and that's the target.

[3:14:06] We have that $10.3 million grant.

[3:14:09] So the gap is 7.5 million or thereabouts.

[3:14:15] So the process, I've been speaking with banks for three or four months, just to gauge feasibility.

[3:14:24] And then we brought in a placement agent, Oppenheimer who's very good at soliciting a wider net.

[3:14:34] And they did a very good job. They went out to 10 banks.

[3:14:38] The ask of these banks was a structure where we had a path.

[3:14:46] We, of course, want to low rates flexible terms.

[3:14:49] We wanted a longer term of 20 year term just to make the payment easier for the

[3:15:00] A path up front would be great. But since this is a just a brand new enterprise, new business, if you will, public business, broadband enterprise, having that general fund backed up as the business gets started.

[3:15:19] It was like likelihood, but we were asking for that not to be the case or a clear path on how the

[3:15:27] general fund could be removed from the backstop.

[3:15:31] So we got four good bids from reputable banks, banner bank, ever bank, cap one, and flag star

[3:15:40] bank.

[3:15:41] I had 20 years, the interest rates, I guess the one on the right was 15 years, so which

[3:15:49] kind of put them out of the running right away because it makes the payment too high for what we wanted to have as an annual payment.

[3:15:58] The two that I would focus in on are banner bank and ever bank both were 20 years attractive rate.

[3:16:04] The one differentiating factor here is Everbank gave us the method for how the city could remove the backstop of the general fund if the business the broadband business started to prove itself out over a certain number of years.

[3:16:28] Banner Bank provided a good bid 20 years, 5% rate, but they did not want to stand in and be the lender for the long term if the business proved out.

[3:16:46] They wanted the city to pre-pay their loan and then find other money.

[3:16:52] and they might have stepped up for it, but we didn't know that introduced interest rate risk

[3:16:56] and other possible issues at that time in the future when the business starts to prove itself out.

[3:17:04] So for that reason, we do recommend every bank.

[3:17:11] Lowest rate, it gives us an opportunity to

[3:17:17] to show that the business, if you will, the public broadband enterprise, and handled the

[3:17:26] debt payments itself over three years, proving that it's showing a one-one and a quarter-time

[3:17:37] coverage on the debt payment for three years, and then there's a mechanism in the documents

[3:17:42] to remove the city's general fund backed up,

[3:17:46] which was what we were looking for.

[3:17:49] There's no assets being pledged to this transaction.

[3:17:51] It's a straight revenue pledge.

[3:17:54] They do ask for one year debt service reserve fund,

[3:17:57] which is standard credit feature.

[3:17:59] We're recommending that the city utilize funds.

[3:18:05] That it's already has and restrict those towards this transaction and invest them

[3:18:11] as opposed to raising the money and having a negative carry on that money, which would dilute

[3:18:17] the economics a bit more. There is flexible pre-payments if there's a better deal to be found

[3:18:24] down the road. There is some options for changing our net debt payment. We may want to add some

[3:18:39] term as the business gets started.

[3:18:49] I don't know if you can all read these, these figures.

[3:18:52] This is really what we have been a guiding document. We've spent a lot of time over the last

[3:18:59] several months speaking with your consultants, Mitch and Sage and Sarah and your city manager.

[3:19:07] Really, really refining the business, the performance numbers have been gone through the

[3:19:14] transition from the MCN situation and over time as the fibers installed and that service is ruled out.

[3:19:24] You can see the transition from MCN to the Fort Bragg broadband public entity figures, where we stabilize the operations, if you will, in about three and a half years out.

[3:19:41] So that the first full normalized year is 2021.

[3:19:47] As you can see, all the revenues that would put some detail to the revenues

[3:19:54] really analyzed using the expertise of Sage, particularly, who's had been with MCN

[3:20:04] on some of the expenditures, and what you can see down there that's in the dotted box,

[3:20:10] which I think is what we're really focused is can this new enterprise carry the debt payment.

[3:20:17] We are projecting in this pro-forma, but it's subject to change,

[3:20:21] that it would be interest only for several years and then would ramp up to a $645,000 annual payment

[3:20:30] for the remainder of the 20-year term. As you can see, there's some negative carry and 2026

[3:20:37] and negative and 2027 and then you start to go positive and 2028 and the first year of

[3:20:45] stabilized performa circumstances in 2029 and I can't really see but I think we're at a 1.4

[3:20:56] times coverage, which if we execute or the city executes on that for three years, that's when

[3:21:07] the backstop from the general fund is removed approximately 2031.

[3:21:15] Are there any questions on this?

[3:21:16] This is a pretty important one, and Sarah's here to talk about if there's the business plan here

[3:21:23] is a pre-strait for one. There's other opportunities that I'm not an expert on that

[3:21:29] Sage and Mitch and Sarah have talked about that might be present that might add to the revenue

[3:21:36] lines, but I think this is something that good to ask questions on.

[3:21:44] I need to show my ignorance, but what is it backed up? Is that a asset that you're holding in

[3:21:52] It's the back stuff, we've structured this, so there's no assets in the transaction, so the initial pledge to pay debt payment to the bank for this loan, if you will, is a gross revenue pledge, so the gross revenue pledge.

[3:22:14] So the the debt payment comes off the top and what is happening here where the teeth are in the the documents is that the city will

[3:22:23] Covenant to maintain and operate this enterprise to a high standard.

[3:22:30] So that means that you're going to pay your salaries.

[3:22:33] You're going to maintain and the operations and that that you can utilize any legally available funds,

[3:22:40] which usually will mean that the general fund is going to stand in if there's negatives that

[3:22:46] you have to pay expenses. The general fund will do that until that lean. That gross pledge

[3:22:52] lean flips after three years of one and one point two five times coverage after those three

[3:22:59] years occur. Then it'll flip to a net revenue pledge and it'll be solely the broadband enterprise

[3:23:07] that is on the hook in general fund, if you will, is removed from the equation.

[3:23:14] But it's a startup enterprise, so that was really a requirement for any lender to step up.

[3:23:26] Was there still a possibility of the MCN transition being cheaper than it was originally planned?

[3:23:37] We're still working through that process.

[3:23:42] I do not have a formal response at this time,

[3:23:45] but we are awaiting some of the documents

[3:23:48] that we've requested from MCM to confirm that evaluation

[3:23:52] of half a million dollars.

[3:23:54] But at this time, I cannot formally say that it's going to be lower

[3:23:59] until we receive all that documents

[3:24:01] and have concluded the process.

[3:24:03] Okay, well if it is significantly lower, how does that affect this?

[3:24:09] Yes, so then it would reduce the $50,000 acquisition payment that's on the last line there.

[3:24:19] Based on the payment terms that we would negotiate based on the amount that the menacing abort would approve and the city council as well.

[3:24:31] but right now it's at 50,000 if it's lower,

[3:24:34] that's going to be lower as well.

[3:24:40] Other questions, colleagues?

[3:24:41] So really tonight, we're just giving direction

[3:24:43] as to select the ever bank, and then we'll go through

[3:24:49] a bond council, and then our credit approval through the bank.

[3:24:53] And then we, we're not really finalized.

[3:24:55] We're just giving directions tonight,

[3:24:58] and there's the one right there.

[3:25:03] So that timeline, really,

[3:25:05] You did it on the head, sir.

[3:25:09] Back in November, I think you had given direction

[3:25:14] and authorization to your CManger to execute a term sheet.

[3:25:20] But that was for a four and a half million dollar gallon.

[3:25:24] And we thought we're going to move fairly rapidly

[3:25:26] and we slowed everything down to nail the proton

[3:25:29] down, wait for the bid to actually come in.

[3:25:33] Thanksfully, we did.

[3:25:34] So, and now it's a higher amount, but again, so it's a higher amount.

[3:25:39] You need to look at everything once again to give your city manager direction, which

[3:25:46] had been given previously, to execute that term sheet, and that needs to be done by tomorrow.

[3:25:52] The lender has asked, we've asked for an extension, they gave it, we've got the bids

[3:25:58] about 10, 12 days ago.

[3:26:01] But we wanted to do this.

[3:26:02] So, and the big piece of grant funding for this, there's a timeline too, right?

[3:26:07] There is.

[3:26:09] Which is why I wanted to make sure this timeline is okay.

[3:26:12] I think the December 26th is to expand all the funds.

[3:26:18] But, as I just wanted to address so, the reason this is coming back,

[3:26:22] because obviously the higher required funding.

[3:26:27] I know you had given direction for me to sign that term sheet,

[3:26:31] but I wanted to bring this back just because

[3:26:33] the amount's higher and that's why they're coming forward.

[3:26:36] The Sarah, did you want to speak to the grant?

[3:26:38] I just wanted to say that after talking to the CPUC last week,

[3:26:44] that they have some state money, some federal money,

[3:26:48] and they're planning and finishing out most of these projects

[3:26:50] with state funding, and so it even sounds like our expenditure

[3:26:53] date might get to be able to be extended.

[3:26:55] So just when you said it, we have to, I'm hoping we have more

[3:26:59] a little more important.

[3:27:01] Don't worry, questions.

[3:27:04] How did we undershoot so much?

[3:27:07] Can you tell us what went into these bits?

[3:27:10] I'm sorry, you know, what happened?

[3:27:12] Yeah, I think it's true.

[3:27:14] There's a few different things that are going

[3:27:17] about the original FFA application that we put together

[3:27:21] was a little half-baked.

[3:27:23] The timeline was very quick, and so we just really

[3:27:26] pedal to the metal, just did the hours that we to make sure that we had something solid.

[3:27:31] So we've been kind of really going back ever since we got turned in that application

[3:27:35] and refining it and reworking it until we get to a point where we felt really solid with it.

[3:27:41] And then when the bids came in, they came in higher, the construction bids, then we anticipated.

[3:27:47] And that's in both that and the construction management bid. And that's we didn't really have.

[3:27:52] It's kind of the gold rush right now in California with broadband construction and construction management.

[3:27:58] We didn't really know what we were going to get.

[3:28:01] One of the things I've noticed is that the main discrepancies with the directional drill boring.

[3:28:07] You can go through granite rock and you're going to be going to cost you a lot more money or you can go through

[3:28:12] Sandy, you know, Sandy rock, you know, Sandy subsurface like we have here and it could go from

[3:28:19] $13 to $80 a square foot, and we just didn't know how people were going to react. You know, do that. We ended up choosing somebody that had, I think it was $30 a square foot, which was even higher than what we put. I think we put in $24 a square foot based on our sandy soils. So that's what happened.

[3:28:38] Let's see if it was around that drill boring.

[3:28:42] Ouch.

[3:28:46] Any other questions for comments?

[3:28:48] Otherwise, I'll open it up to the public.

[3:28:52] Anyone in the room like to speak on the side?

[3:29:00] Hey, Jacob Patterson.

[3:29:02] At first, I was actually kind of hesitant about our general fund taking any potential liability about this,

[3:29:08] but I was very happy to read in this that there is an escape patch built into this lender,

[3:29:14] which is why I'm glad they recommended this particular lender without that.

[3:29:18] I don't think we should do this. I was also concerned that the bid through so high are

[3:29:23] saying, I should say bid, because we did only get a single bid. There's no comparisons. We just got one.

[3:29:29] But we are kind of remote and we always have trouble getting contractors to come up here and do things.

[3:29:36] My other question and concern about this project was when last time when you guys talked about it,

[3:29:43] to describe that it was going to be built

[3:29:45] to how only two little stubs of the property line.

[3:29:48] And then I was like, well, who's going to pay

[3:29:49] for the connection between the app and the house?

[3:29:52] And she said, they have, in fact, but she did it all that

[3:29:54] for the utility to do it.

[3:29:55] Because I thought in Fort Bragg, with a lot of people,

[3:29:58] even though this will be cheaper.

[3:30:01] If there's a significant cost to actually get it connected to your house, I think a lot of people wouldn't do it.

[3:30:07] I mean, people of trouble paying their water bills here, who wants to front money.

[3:30:11] But since the utility is going to pay that, I think most people will sign up for this.

[3:30:16] Like I personally am looking forward to this.

[3:30:18] And out of all our economic development initiatives, I think this is the one that is the most solid that has the most likely return on investment.

[3:30:28] So, I encourage you to approve this.

[3:30:31] The one question I was going to ask before he answered it already was,

[3:30:34] do we have a pre-payment penalty?

[3:30:36] Can we pre-pay this?

[3:30:38] And he said, yes, there are pre-payment options.

[3:30:41] I might want to know a little bit more details about that.

[3:30:44] But if interest rates go down,

[3:30:46] we do have the option of revamping and paying it earlier, whatever.

[3:30:51] But to me, I recommend you approve this.

[3:30:54] Despite some hesitations I've had, I feel comfortable based on what I've heard. Thank you.

[3:31:02] All right, thank you. Anyone else in the room?

[3:31:07] All right, online.

[3:31:09] Please use the raise hand feature for Peppa comments on 8A.

[3:31:17] Enter Jordan, you have three minutes.

[3:31:20] Hi, thank you.

[3:31:22] I think Mr. Patterson's remarks are on point.

[3:31:27] I think they have a lot of validity.

[3:31:30] On the technical side, fiber optics is going to transcend the geography that isolates Fort

[3:31:37] Bragg.

[3:31:41] And I think this is an investment in the future that will pay off for the city, hopefully

[3:31:47] admirably, hopefully really well.

[3:31:50] But along with that, there may be the issue of gentrification, where people are attracted

[3:31:57] to this location and invest and improve their houses and businesses and there may be more

[3:32:07] competition for the limited space here.

[3:32:14] The foresight that the council can exercise in creating

[3:32:18] this asset for the community, I think will create a lot of benefit for the schools, businesses,

[3:32:23] and the families and residents is here in Fort Bragg.

[3:32:27] I'm kind of dismayed that the city has to suffer an additional burden,

[3:32:32] but if we have limited bidders for the project, that may be just something we're stuck with.

[3:32:40] As far as hasty or loose or kind of back of the envelope calculations,

[3:32:47] I always hope that that is made clear to the council at the very outset

[3:32:52] So that they kind of know how much risk and reliance is available to the City Council for these projects.

[3:33:02] Thank you very much.

[3:33:10] Okay.

[3:33:11] Bring back to council for discussion and direction.

[3:33:18] I'd like to see this go forward with this.

[3:33:22] I'll remember how it

[3:33:26] counts.

[3:33:27] I think we've been down this roadways and we're not turning back.

[3:33:33] So let's keep moving forward.

[3:33:34] I think this is, I know there, I got a question today

[3:33:39] from someone that said, what's the benefit

[3:33:42] of broadband for drag?

[3:33:46] And not being the most computer literate person, in fact,

[3:33:50] being almost computer literate, I really could answer that.

[3:33:55] So I'm all for this and everything.

[3:33:58] And I know we've talked about it before, but hopefully,

[3:34:03] people understand at least from my perspective, and what I've heard about businesses, about the

[3:34:10] education, will advantages of this. Just about the going to the League of California cities,

[3:34:19] talking to other communities, other council members and mayors, and what a difference it made to

[3:34:25] their community. One little one is winter's California. Folks know where that is. They somehow connected

[3:34:31] to broadband met a huge difference for them.

[3:34:33] A small little farming community between Davis and Lake Barrier,

[3:34:38] so I know that there's advantages.

[3:34:41] I just I can't articulate what they are,

[3:34:42] because that's just I think I'm just too old and that went by me.

[3:34:47] I won't wait, but so yeah, let's let's do this.

[3:34:52] I could say that it took 10 hours to upload all the pictures

[3:34:56] for the well-run on the broadband that we have today.

[3:35:02] And with new one, I imagine it would be like, thank you.

[3:35:10] Are you going to be pre-selling this?

[3:35:12] Or we're just going to wait till we open up and then go solicit people to sign up or you're going to pre-sell this?

[3:35:19] Yeah, we're going to start with current MCN customers.

[3:35:24] We'll kind of come on board.

[3:35:25] And then we will undertake a robust marketing effort to get more customers from other competitors here in the community.

[3:35:37] There's also opportunities for a future development to kind of have the city's broadband, the part of those development process.

[3:35:46] And then there's other opportunities like telehealth, tele education, but but so step one is to make sure the MCN customers come one board. So day one, you're getting that revenue with an upgraded service and then undertaking more marketing outfits and that's why the team is is important to make sure it's a successful enterprise.

[3:36:07] So the eight full-time employees will be very critical in making sure it's successful, right?

[3:36:16] And then of course to all the economic development opportunities that it would bring from remote work to a greenhouse structure here.

[3:36:24] It checks all the boxes and it also ties into the cities overall goals on improving the way we support our businesses and our community.

[3:36:34] But, you know, the performance speaks for itself with a being in the black, once we have, you know, kind of fully service and 2029.

[3:36:46] And then we'll just add to that and we'll go and follow it.

[3:36:48] And, you know, MCN has a lot of support locally.

[3:36:52] So we're taking those customers just upgrading the service and doubling down on our marketing efforts.

[3:36:57] That's the plan.

[3:37:00] All right. Thank you.

[3:37:02] I certainly feel the risk and I feel the concerns of, you know, I think we're seeing this over and over again,

[3:37:09] the things you've sent up costing more than is anticipated. I mean, it just keeps acting for practically everything.

[3:37:16] And so I think in some respects, that's the nature of the beast. But when you think about the kinds of things

[3:37:21] a city government can do to try to, say, diversify our economy, you know, and come up with new jobs for our

[3:37:27] high school graduates or those who go to college and come back or want to come back and live here,

[3:37:30] They're not that many ways that we can do it, and this is a very concrete mechanism for doing exactly that.

[3:37:37] So it does involve risk, but it is also one that is far-seeing and one that has a lot of potential gain.

[3:37:46] So my hope is, and the big concern for me is that it remains affordable.

[3:37:51] We want this to be affordable service for people, so that has to be one of the overarching goals.

[3:37:56] But otherwise, we get, are we ready to direct?

[3:38:01] Vice Mayor, we haven't heard from you.

[3:38:08] Yes.

[3:38:09] I was on for it, and I changed my mind, and I was like, no, this is a bad idea.

[3:38:15] But then I did a little research and talk to a couple of people and let's go.

[3:38:22] Okay.

[3:38:23] We'll go for it in the long run.

[3:38:26] All right,

[3:38:30] so Isaac, we want to be sure to give you the direction that you need, or we

[3:38:34] ready to direct you to pursue a loan with ever bank, but we'll have to count some members

[3:38:42] thumbs up if you want to pursue the ever bank.

[3:38:43] Back in that interest rate, lock in that interest rate, you've got until tomorrow, okay?

[3:38:48] All right, we have, it looks like we have five thumbs up.

[3:38:51] What's that?

[3:38:54] I'm sorry.

[3:38:54] Oh, yes, sure.

[3:38:59] Yeah, and if we can do a roll call set of quote, please.

[3:39:07] Peters. Yes.

[3:39:08] Bucket.

[3:39:09] Elven Smith. Absolutely. Yes.

[3:39:12] Rathen in.

[3:39:13] Good.

[3:39:13] Yes.

[3:39:15] All right.

[3:39:16] That will take us to item 80.

[3:39:19] Presentation from hope consulting,

[3:39:22] recycled water feasibility study, overview,

[3:39:25] and information on community involvement.

[3:39:27] Mr. Smith, are you going to do this for us?

[3:39:29] Yes, sir.

[3:39:30] Okay, thank you very much.

[3:39:32] It's very rare.

[3:39:34] Hope.

[3:39:35] We have Carrie and Scather.

[3:39:39] Welcome.

[3:39:40] Yeah, thanks for hanging out with us for such a long time.

[3:39:45] Just a very excellent company.

[3:39:48] Done fantastic work thus far,

[3:39:50] and we're just looking forward to finishing this,

[3:39:53] and get some more water connected to our system.

[3:39:56] So I'll let them describe and speak.

[3:40:01] They're the experts, and I'll hang up with them.

[3:40:08] Well, thank you.

[3:40:11] Are we able to queue up the PowerPoint?

[3:40:15] Yep, I'm feeling ahead of right now.

[3:40:16] Let me know when you guys can see it in the council chambers.

[3:40:22] And we can go to the next slide.

[3:40:24] Good evening, Honorable Mayor and City Council members.

[3:40:27] My name is Curie Dale, and I am the Director of Water Resources

[3:40:30] with Hoke Consulting. Hoke was hired to develop the city's recycled water feasibility study,

[3:40:37] and a component of this work is to provide public outreach and engagement. Tonight's presentation

[3:40:44] consists of an overview of the city's water supply sources and the challenges, particularly

[3:40:50] for this community, an overview of the feasibility study, and then also what is in the queue for

[3:40:58] public engagement work. Also providing portions of the presentation this evening is

[3:41:04] Skyler Stevens. She is a senior water resource specialist with Hoke and is primarily

[3:41:09] handling the public outreach component of the project.

[3:41:14] This evening I will be presenting on the details of the city's water supply system.

[3:41:19] Customer water demands overview of the feasibility study and ways that the community can

[3:41:25] engage with the project team to provide input on supply alternatives.

[3:41:29] So let's jump in.

[3:41:34] First I'm going to start today by doing a quick overview of the city's current water supply system.

[3:41:41] Fort Bragg's water supply utilizes three natural surface water sources that work together to keep water flowing to the community.

[3:41:49] They are waterfall gulch, numen gulch, and the noo-river.

[3:41:54] During winter and spring months, waterfall gulch and numen gulch serve as primary water sources

[3:42:00] with the noo-river providing supplemental supplies needed.

[3:42:06] These tributary sources are particularly valuable as they utilize gravity flow to deliver

[3:42:12] high-quality raw water to the treatment facility, requiring no pumping infrastructure.

[3:42:20] As seasonal patterns shift into summer, decreased flows in the tributary streams, increases

[3:42:27] reliance on the Nio River.

[3:42:30] Water from the Nio River must be pumped to reach the treatment plant.

[3:42:34] Currently the city maintains a total water storage capacity of 22.6 million gallons across

[3:42:40] system infrastructure to help manage these seasonal variations. This capacity allows for the city to store

[3:42:47] excess water during wet months to be utilized as needed during dry times.

[3:42:56] Now that you understand

[3:42:57] where the water comes from, let me show you how it gets to your tap. The water treatment plant is

[3:43:03] like a giant filter for the whole city. It can treat up to 2.2 million gallons of water per day,

[3:43:10] which is enough to fill three Olympic-sized swimming pools.

[3:43:15] The plant takes the water we just talked about from the streams and rivers and makes it safe for everyone to drink.

[3:43:21] The city also has the emergency storage in the summer's lane reservoir.

[3:43:26] Just like you might save money for a rainy day, the city saves water there for dry times.

[3:43:32] After everyone in town uses the water it needs to be cleaned.

[3:43:36] That's where the wastewater treatment plant comes in.

[3:43:38] And this facility can handle almost 1 million gallons of used water on dry days.

[3:43:44] The best part is that most of the water moves through the city naturally downhill using gravity instead of pumps.

[3:43:52] These facilities are the backbone of the water and wastewater system.

[3:43:56] But the city is looking for ways to make the facilities meet future water demand, especially during dry times.

[3:44:05] The city currently relies on this interconnected surface water system, and while this system

[3:44:12] has served the community well, recent experiences with drought and climate change have highlighted

[3:44:17] some important challenges the city needs to address.

[3:44:22] During drought conditions, the city has had to implement emergency conservation measures to maintain

[3:44:27] essential water service for the community. The situations have made it clear that the city needs

[3:44:33] diversify its water supply portfolio. Just like your bank account having a diversity of water

[3:44:40] supply sources allows the city to be more reliable as changing environmental circumstances

[3:44:46] come into play. These drought and climate events have taught the city a valuable lesson about the

[3:44:52] importance of having multiple reliable water sources to serve Fort Bragg's residents and businesses.

[3:44:58] wildest

[3:45:00] City is implemented robust conservation measures. It is also simultaneously exploring additional water supply options that could enhance the system's reliability.

[3:45:13] And let me explain why diversifying the water supply is so critical for Fort Bragg. Think of it like managing your retirement portfolio. You wouldn't want to invest everything in just one stock. California's climate has become increasingly unpredictable.

[3:45:29] and you've seen this firsthand years of severe drought

[3:45:33] destroying the water supplies followed by intense storms

[3:45:36] that overwhelm the systems.

[3:45:38] It's like experiencing both feast and famine

[3:45:41] when it comes to water resources.

[3:45:44] Currently, as I mentioned, the city relies heavily

[3:45:46] on its streams and rivers.

[3:45:48] And while these have served you well,

[3:45:50] it's similar to depending on just one source of income

[3:45:54] when that source is affected, everyone feels the impact.

[3:45:57] During extended dry periods these surface water sources become increasingly vulnerable, and that's why you're exploring additional water supply options.

[3:46:08] Having multiple water sources works like diversifying your investments, it provides security and stability.

[3:46:16] If one source is stressed due to drought, you can lean more heavily on others to meet the community's needs.

[3:46:22] By planning ahead and developing new water sources now, you're building a more resilient system that can handle whatever weather patterns come your way.

[3:46:32] This will ensure that Fort Brake will have reliable water access not just today, but for generations to come.

[3:46:42] This past December, hoe consulting was hired by the city to conduct a recycled water feasibility study to assess the feasibility of using recycled water for various reuse applications.

[3:46:54] to enhance the resilience and reliability of its water system.

[3:47:00] The feasibility study is a technical evaluation

[3:47:03] that helps determine the best solutions

[3:47:06] before making major investments.

[3:47:09] This process ensures that any future water supply project

[3:47:12] is technically sound and cost effective

[3:47:15] or the community.

[3:47:17] The feasibility study is also a necessary step

[3:47:20] to lay the groundwork for various grant funding

[3:47:22] for the construction aspect of the project.

[3:47:25] The study will focus on identifying and prioritizing the most viable alternatives

[3:47:31] and providing a plan for implementing cost-effective treatment technologies that comply with current regulations.

[3:47:39] Key project elements include assessing water, customer water demands, determining available sources and volumes of recycled water,

[3:47:48] Cost estimates and project feasibility, system hydraulics and capacity,

[3:47:55] pollution control alternatives, potential, environmental impacts both beneficial and adverse

[3:48:01] and permitting challenges, pipeline locations and the feasibility of serving customers.

[3:48:10] Now let me walk you through what this feasibility study really means for the community.

[3:48:14] Think of it as doing your due diligence before making a major home improvement.

[3:48:18] You want to make sure you're making the right investment for the right reasons.

[3:48:23] And during this process, we'll be looking at various water supply options,

[3:48:27] evaluating what's possible, what's practical, and what makes the most sense for Fort Bragg.

[3:48:33] We'll examine the technical aspects such as can it be constructed, the environmental impacts,

[3:48:39] how it affects the surroundings, and the cost versus the benefits such as

[3:48:45] is it a good investment for the community.

[3:48:47] The study will give the city the detailed information that will be needed to make smart decisions about the city's water future.

[3:48:55] Most importantly, your input matters.

[3:48:58] Think of this as a community-wide discussion about your water future.

[3:49:02] Your perspectives and concerns will help shape which options the city pursues,

[3:49:07] ensuring that it's final decisions reflect what's best for everyone in Fort Bragg.

[3:49:12] This study is also fully funded from the state water resources, controlled boards, water recycling program with no additional funds from the city's budget.

[3:49:26] So here's something fascinating about water.

[3:49:28] It's been cycling through earth since the beginning of time.

[3:49:32] Nothing news ever created and nothing is ever truly destroyed.

[3:49:36] And what we're doing with water reuse is simply speeding up nature's own purification process using proven technology

[3:49:43] that's been successfully implemented in communities around the world for decades.

[3:49:50] There are three types of water reuse that are being considered for Fort Bragg.

[3:49:55] Non-potable recycled water, indirect potable reas, and direct potable reas,

[3:50:02] and I'll dive a little deeper into what each of these are in the next few slides.

[3:50:07] This first one is non-potable recycled water and this is treated water that meets strict state and federal standards for non-drinking water purposes.

[3:50:19] Communities across the United States already use this type of water to irrigate barks, golf courses and other landscaping.

[3:50:27] It's a reliable way to reduce the demand on the drinking water supply and is also known as recycled water.

[3:50:34] And next we have indirect, potable reuse or IPR for sure.

[3:50:40] Think of this as adding an extra step to nature's water cycle.

[3:50:45] We take water that's already been highly treated and put it through additional treatment

[3:50:50] steps called advanced purification processes.

[3:50:53] Then water is stored in an environmental buffer, like a reservoir,

[3:50:58] where it mixes with other water sources.

[3:51:01] And then before it reaches your tap it goes through one final treatment

[3:51:04] at the drinking water plant to ensure it meets all federal and state standards.

[3:51:10] The third type of reuse is direct-putable reuse or DPR, and this is the newest option.

[3:51:17] California recently established standards for implementing this type of treatment system.

[3:51:23] DPR uses the most advanced treatment processes available to purify water

[3:51:27] to drinking standards without an environmental buffer.

[3:51:30] While the technology is cutting edge, the processes backed by rigorous monitoring and testing

[3:51:36] requirements to ensure water safety.

[3:51:40] Each of these options represents a proven safe approach to expanding the city's water supply

[3:51:47] portfolio.

[3:51:49] Through this feasibility study, we'll determine which option or a combination of the options

[3:51:54] makes the most sense for Fort Brakes feature.

[3:52:02] Let me share a little bit about where we are in this important process and then what lies ahead.

[3:52:09] Again, think of this feasibility study like building a house.

[3:52:13] We're currently in the foundation phase making sure that we have all the right information to build upon.

[3:52:19] Right now we're in the crucial data gathering stage.

[3:52:23] The project team is doing a thorough evaluation of the city's current water and wastewater systems,

[3:52:28] reviewing technical documents and studies, and we're looking at how the water moves through the system with the treatment capabilities are and where improvements may be needed to develop water reuse options.

[3:52:42] Once we have this foundation of information, we'll move into evaluating different alternatives.

[3:52:49] We'll be looking at the various options that I mentioned, developing cost estimates and determining what makes the most sense for Fort Brag technically and financially.

[3:52:58] We know community input is vital to this process so we'll be coming back to you with another presentation once we have more detailed information to share.

[3:53:07] This will give you a chance to see what we've learned and provide your valuable feedback.

[3:53:13] The entire study will wrap up in November of 2025 with a comprehensive report that will guide the city's water supply decisions moving forward.

[3:53:25] And with that, I'm going to turn the rest of the presentation over to Skyler.

[3:53:33] You're on mute Skyler.

[3:53:42] Sorry about that.

[3:53:54] Tell me to go ahead and take it.

[3:53:56] No, I got it, and I'm sorry.

[3:53:57] The night wasn't going up.

[3:53:59] Your voice matters in shaping pork brides water future.

[3:54:02] As we explore ways to diversify the city's water supply,

[3:54:05] we want to ensure that every solution considered reflects the community's needs and values.

[3:54:09] The city is not just building infrastructure, it's building a more resilient future and that's why we have created multiple pathways for you to stay informed and share your thoughts throughout this process.

[3:54:21] We made it easy for you to stay connected with this important project.

[3:54:25] The dedicated project website serves as your one stop resource for updates and information.

[3:54:33] In fact, I encourage you to take out your phones and scan the QR code on the screen to share your thoughts today.

[3:54:41] We'll continue to host presentations like this one to keep you informed and gather your feedback.

[3:54:46] Our next workshop presentation will be about the alternatives we have developed.

[3:54:51] And for those who prefer social media, we'll be posting project updates to Facebook,

[3:54:55] Whether you prefer to take the survey, attend meetings, or engage online, we want to hear from you.

[3:55:01] Your insights will help us develop water, supply solutions that truly serve court rags needs for generations to come.

[3:55:13] And now, um, back to you, Kerry.

[3:55:16] Okay.

[3:55:18] We've covered a lot of ground today, and now I'd like to open the floor for your questions.

[3:55:22] Your insights and concerns are valuable to us as we move forward with this important study before we

[3:55:29] Begin the Q&A I want to remind everyone that you can scan the QR code to take our survey

[3:55:35] Now please bookmark

[3:55:36] The project website to stay updated on our progress whether you have questions now or think of them later

[3:55:43] We want to maintain an open dialogue throughout the process

[3:55:46] us. With that, I'll just wrap it up and open it up for any questions or discussion.

[3:56:46] I just have one question and that's something that someone brought up to me and having

[3:56:50] worked with a water board under familiar with these kind of projects.

[3:56:56] Descent or is in your

[3:56:58] planning are you looking at how much space is needed to put in a recycled plant?

[3:57:08] Yes, that's a great question. Part of the evaluation of the alternatives will be

[3:57:15] looking at what the footprint will be required for the different treatment technologies.

[3:57:21] And then as part of that, there's also an environmental evaluation on whether that footprint

[3:57:27] has any, any sort of impacts that would require any additional environmental work being done through

[3:57:37] SQA or NEPA. So those are things that will be evaluated.

[3:57:43] Hopefully not NEPA, but also there's a huge lab involved, right, laboratory.

[3:57:55] I'm not quite sure I'm understanding your context to that.

[3:57:59] And there's a, is there a large building involved for laboratory?

[3:58:05] I don't think a laboratory is part of the treatment.

[3:58:09] Yeah, I've got it.

[3:58:14] Any other questions?

[3:58:17] Yeah, I'm just curious.

[3:58:18] Well, first of all, thanks for hanging in there with us tonight.

[3:58:20] Appreciate it.

[3:58:24] One of the things we've talked about, and I think the whole state of California

[3:58:28] that's near the coast has sort of the explorer,

[3:58:32] question themselves whether it's possible to capture the stormwater one-off that occurs

[3:58:39] here and somehow bump it back up to the treatment plan or back into the river or

[3:58:45] you know somehow capture that. Is that part of this feasibility study? Because I know

[3:58:49] one of our council members has brought this up almost every time public works appeared to me.

[3:58:55] So

[3:58:59] that's a good question as well.

[3:59:02] I don't think that's part of the different water supply alternatives that this study will cover.

[3:59:11] The funding pool of money from the state requires that the project used recycled water or the wastewater as the source water for the project.

[3:59:24] So although that's a very attractive sort of water supply development idea, it's not something

[3:59:34] that's covered under the grant.

[3:59:39] Thank you.

[3:59:40] Any other questions?

[3:59:43] If not, we will entertain public comment.

[3:59:47] Despite the fact that I would actually like to be in bed right now.

[3:59:50] I totally agree with what Lindy said.

[3:59:54] However, I think if we are able to create a facility to treat our...

[4:00:00] Treated wastewater, we probably could be able to pretty easily in our own pipe up the stormwater and use the same facility.

[4:00:08] It might be when I'm looking at this, I'm glad that Scott asked if we were paying for this ourselves, because I wouldn't want us to use our money on this study.

[4:00:17] It seems to play too broad. There is no scenario where we're going to reach our groundwater here. We don't get any of our water from groundwater.

[4:00:25] like that's a total waste of time money to study that just because we don't use it.

[4:00:31] I don't really see a lot of benefit for us doing water that's non-potable and just going

[4:00:37] to the sports fields. We only have them from those schools that doesn't seem to be huge use.

[4:00:43] However, if this will get a study that shows us and perhaps maybe we can focus it

[4:00:49] are narrowly, just about using potable water for,

[4:00:53] sorry, reusing our treated waste water for potable water.

[4:00:58] That to me makes a lot of sense.

[4:01:00] I think it's at least 500 gallons,

[4:01:02] I have 100,000 gallons a day.

[4:01:05] That's a huge water source compared to the other options we have.

[4:01:09] So to me, that part is worthwhile

[4:01:10] to rest of this scene silly.

[4:01:14] But things we don't pay for it,

[4:01:15] I guess there's no reason to worry about it.

[4:01:19] Anybody else in the room? Madam clerk, anybody online?

[4:01:27] This used the raise hand feature if you have a public comment for eight.

[4:01:37] All right, colleagues, any further discussion?

[4:01:40] There is no action requested.

[4:01:43] So, thanks so much for your presentation.

[4:01:46] Thank you.

[4:01:47] Thank you, ladies.

[4:01:48] All right, thank you.

[4:01:50] Have a good night.

[4:01:52] We'll take us to our last item of business item eight C.

[4:01:54] receive general plan annual progress report 2024 and housing element annual progress report

[4:02:01] who housing and community development and provide comments prior to submit all to housing and community

[4:02:08] development. All right, last and least. Last but not least. So I'm not going to go through the entire

[4:02:21] report. I'll just give you a little bit of context for it. I'm assuming that you all had a

[4:02:27] chance to read it. But essentially, cities are mandated by the state to submit this report every

[4:02:35] year and it gets admitted to OPR, which is the Office of Planning and Research and HCD Department

[4:02:43] of Housing and Community Development. This is the report for the 2024 calendar year and

[4:02:50] on the first, which is why we're here so late tonight, because part of the requirement is that council

[4:02:59] review and accept the report before we submit it to HCD and OPR. This report first went to

[4:03:07] planning commission on March 12, weeks ago and after that meeting we made a couple little adjustments

[4:03:14] to the report based on some minor monthly errors that we found in the course of that meeting.

[4:03:25] And certainly there's opportunity for further edits before we say we have a week.

[4:03:31] So if you do have some things that you want to add or strike, that's that's fine.

[4:03:36] There's two components to this report. The annual progress report is mostly narrative

[4:03:42] in its organized by the general plan elements.

[4:03:46] So you have the safety element, the noise element,

[4:03:48] the housing element, blabberal orders,

[4:03:50] a bunch of those.

[4:03:54] And for each element you just, we've just gone through

[4:03:57] and kind of elicit a few of the things that the city

[4:04:02] is accomplished in carrying out those policies

[4:04:05] from our general plan elements.

[4:04:10] And I think it's kind of important to note that the intention is not to kind of

[4:04:17] kind of go raise every single thing that we've done 24 or just hitting the highlights.

[4:04:22] So if there's something in there that you don't see it's fine unless it's something that

[4:04:28] we miss that's pretty important and you want to repeat happily do that.

[4:04:34] So this report begins with a housing element since that is considered kind of the priority for the state and also it's

[4:04:46] PhDD. So the bigger focus on our housing initiatives and things that we

[4:04:55] accomplished or early started in 2024, one of them being the housing

[4:05:01] development that you approve tonight.

[4:05:07] It also gives a few

[4:05:11] And then the second component is the spreadsheet that kind of tracks everything from start to finish, most of the stats that we provide to planning commission, we don't get here with them very much, but at the planning commission level,

[4:05:26] mostly incorporate what we did, you know, like we approve this many permits.

[4:05:35] This report is actually kind of pulled because it looks attracts a permit from entitlement through the permitting through

[4:05:46] final occupancy. So it starts from the application all the way to the end.

[4:05:51] And there's really no other report that I know that we do that does that.

[4:05:55] Even though we're forced to do this report,

[4:05:58] I think it's kind of handy in that sense

[4:06:00] if you're interested in that kind of

[4:06:02] nitty-gritty-ditty-ditty-gritty data.

[4:06:05] We cooperated, Maria Flynn, and I cooperated on this,

[4:06:08] and she actually did the spread key portion.

[4:06:12] So if you have questions about that,

[4:06:14] then we'll come up and try to answer those.

[4:06:19] And that's all from me,

[4:06:21] unless you have questions or discussion, thanks.

[4:06:26] colleagues any question, but they're a plan update or a housing element.

[4:06:33] So it's a great way to see things that have been accomplished to review things kind of nice in the context of our recent budget meeting.

[4:06:40] Just seeing things that have been happening.

[4:06:44] And yeah, housing element as well.

[4:06:48] I'm glad it's required that you have to refresh just because otherwise, these things just

[4:06:55] happen and we have no idea what's going on. So we should, uh, when we look back, see what we've

[4:07:02] done. Thank you.

[4:07:06] There. No. Yeah. Thanks for the report. If there are no other questions, I'll

[4:07:10] invite public comment. Anyone in the room? No. Madam, anybody online?

[4:07:18] Please use the raise hand feature for public comment on item 8C and there are no hands.

[4:07:27] All right then let's bring it back to council.

[4:07:31] Do we really have no action?

[4:07:33] Are there any items that we would like to include that we're not seeing?

[4:07:36] No, I just want to point out I think somewhere in here it said in 2024 there were 145 permit applications

[4:07:45] or a two person department. Keep that in mind.

[4:07:52] Yes, I sincerely hope that we don't

[4:07:56] allow these new apartments which is approved to go to condos. I don't know how we can prevent that.

[4:08:05] Well, with that, I will adjourn. Thanks so much. Thanks to all of you for sticking

[4:08:11] out, see me.

City Council

Agenda

Transcript