[0:22] testing.
[3:09] Oh yes.
[4:06] All right. Good evening and welcome to
[4:09] the uh Tuesday, January 27th planning
[4:12] commission meeting. Uh we'll go ahead
[4:13] and call this meeting to order and we
[4:15] will begin with the pledge of
[4:17] allegiance.
[4:23] I aliance to the flag of the United
[4:26] States of America and to the republic
[4:29] for which it stands. One nation under
[4:32] God, indivisible, with liberty and
[4:36] justice for all.
[4:46] » Roll call, please.
[4:48] Commissioner Connelly
[4:50] » Here.
[4:50] » Commissioner Rhoden
[4:52] » Here.
[4:52] » Commissioner Marlo
[4:53] » Here.
[4:54] » Commissioner Kogler
[4:55] » Here.
[4:55] » Commissioner Neil
[4:56] » Here.
[4:57] » Mr. Christensen
[4:58] » Here.
[4:58] » Chairperson Kar Rubius
[5:00] » Here.
[5:01] » All present.
[5:02] » Staff introductions please.
[5:04] » Marcy Renoso and Jessica Ferguson.
[5:06] Permit technicians.
[5:08] » Warren Fr. Community development
[5:10] director.
[5:19] and Sarah Locklin, legal counsel with
[5:20] BBK.
[5:24] » Good. All right. Moving on then to item
[5:27] E. Are there any general public comments
[5:30] regarding matters not on the agenda?
[5:35] Seeing none in the audience? Marcy, any
[5:38] callers?
[5:40] » No callers.
[5:41] » Thank you.
[5:44] Moving on to uh agenda items proposed to
[5:47] be tabled or rescheduled.
[5:50] » Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um item one, the
[5:53] Beachwood specific plan development
[5:55] agreement amendment. Um the applicant
[5:58] has requested that be continued to a
[6:01] future meeting um date to be determined.
[6:03] It will be renoticed. Um we do know
[6:06] there's a few folks in the audience that
[6:09] were interested in this item. Um I would
[6:11] suggest that we still allow public
[6:13] comment on this but we will there will
[6:15] be no staff report and no um decisions
[6:17] tonight on that item.
[6:19] » Okay, understood. All right, so the
[6:22] first item, the Beachwood specific plan
[6:24] development agreement amendment um has
[6:26] been uh postponed and will be
[6:28] rescheduled. If there are anybody uh
[6:30] participants in the audience that would
[6:32] like to make any comments regarding this
[6:34] particular matter, please feel free come
[6:37] on up, state your name.
[6:44] There's a podium over here to our right.
[6:49] » Good evening, sir. Go ahead and state
[6:51] your name.
[6:52] » I'm David Anderson. I'm a resident of
[6:54] Hassel Rebels. I live at 925 Oral Way.
[6:58] I'm very close to the development um
[7:01] that's under consideration here and I
[7:04] have some concerns. I was in agreement
[7:06] with the um original plan from 2020.
[7:08] These revisions to me uh seem kind of
[7:11] extreme. Um specifically the segregation
[7:15] of the workforce units going from being
[7:18] kind of spread throughout the community
[7:19] to being 91% located in one portion of
[7:23] the development right off of uh beach of
[7:26] metalark road.
[7:28] Um
[7:31] now uh Harry Po I understand is the
[7:35] prime developer here. Is that correct?
[7:38] Okay. And u I have I live in a Herod
[7:40] home. I know my carrot um and I like the
[7:44] Herod the work that they do, but I do
[7:47] have some concerns about the way it's
[7:50] been proposed
[7:52] as opposed to what was originally um
[7:55] agreed to. So if we look at the
[7:58] Beachwood Pacific plan sub areas, you've
[8:00] got Herod A B C1,
[8:03] C2, CH, excuse me, H, J, well Herod all
[8:07] through J through four and the Herod
[8:09] owned subtotal is 46 units of the
[8:12] workforce housing. And here at A
[8:14] originally 5% of that number, the 46 was
[8:18] to be um workforce housing. That's about
[8:22] 11% of the total. Herod B was supposed
[8:24] to be 22% 10 units. Herod C combined was
[8:29] 24 units or 52%.
[8:32] Herod H seven units at 15%.
[8:35] Uh for your amendment, we're looking at
[8:38] 42 units of Herod C1. 91% of all units
[8:42] be located in that one specific area. I
[8:45] don't think it's a big area. One of my
[8:47] big concerns is and I I live in the area
[8:49] there obviously and um what comes to
[8:53] mind to me is what could result there
[8:56] with this kind of concentration is what
[8:59] you have in what's called Crestston
[9:00] Courts. Is anybody here familiar with
[9:01] Crestston Courts? Crestston Courts is at
[9:04] the other end of Beachwood where it
[9:06] intersects and goes to from Pebble Creek
[9:08] up to Crestston up to Crestston there.
[9:11] Uh these were similarly designed to be
[9:13] four units off a central little driveway
[9:16] with a twocar garage for each. Now these
[9:19] are all owner units on Crestston Courts.
[9:22] And uh if you've ever driven down it at
[9:25] night, there is not a parking spot to be
[9:27] found. If you ever driven there during
[9:29] the day, especially garbage collection,
[9:31] it's really tedious because there's
[9:34] always it's always overcrowded with
[9:36] parking. One of my questions to the
[9:38] eight to the group here is, is there
[9:40] going to be public parking on the
[9:42] streets of this development? And if so,
[9:46] how are you going to accommodate folks
[9:47] that can't have loaded their garages
[9:49] with personal equipment, uh, cars that
[9:52] they don't drive necessarily or other
[9:55] things that they've accumulated, which
[9:57] is what's happened at Crestston Courts.
[10:01] So,
[10:10] Um,
[10:12] » Okay.
[10:13] » Thank you.
[10:26] » Good evening. Thank you for letting me
[10:28] speak. Uh Doug Toby uh 510 Cool Valley
[10:32] Drive as a uh 35 year resident of past
[10:36] roles. Something concerns me is the
[10:39] consolidation of the workforce housing
[10:41] in a smaller area. The original plan as
[10:44] I understand as the gentleman just seems
[10:46] to affirm is that it was going to be
[10:48] spread throughout the complex
[10:50] in the [sighs] with with my knowledge of
[10:53] various projects in the community.
[10:54] There's been attention to how those new
[10:57] projects affect the existing. The
[11:00] original plans seem to take that
[11:01] consideration. Nobody wants lower income
[11:04] housing in their backyard, but I
[11:06] understand that's a necessity. And for
[11:08] the benefit of the community, we need to
[11:09] do that. By consolidating all in one
[11:12] area, it seems to benefit only the
[11:14] developer, reduces construction costs,
[11:17] my own assessment, and takes little
[11:20] regard for those people who will be
[11:21] impacted. and and again the gentleman
[11:24] who just spoke has uh reflected my
[11:28] concerns also. So uh I would appreciate
[11:31] concern being taken for those people who
[11:33] are already in the area and how it would
[11:35] impact them and their property values.
[11:39] Thank you.
[11:43] » Anybody else? Yes, ma'am.
[11:51] » Hello. My name is Terry Dyn. I do live
[11:53] on Deer Springs Drive, so right across
[11:56] the street from the uh proposed uh
[11:59] amendment one.
[12:02] And I have the same uh concerns that the
[12:04] last two gentlemen uh have stated in
[12:07] detail. Um I do not agree that this is
[12:11] justifiable
[12:13] uh by Herod. [clears throat]
[12:16] uh the reason to put a negative impact
[12:18] on the existing nearby housing which is
[12:22] directly across the street from me. So
[12:25] by condensing all of these units from
[12:28] the original plan to the amendment again
[12:32] would be 42 units for about 4 and a half
[12:36] acres. That's very very condensed.
[12:39] Um
[12:41] I feel like uh the community outreach
[12:45] was insufficient for this. Um some of
[12:48] the neighbors that I spoken with uh
[12:52] received the card January 14th the
[12:55] notice as I did. Uh some of the
[12:58] neighbors did not even receive the
[13:00] notice. Another issue was the there was
[13:04] only one posting um on uh the corner of
[13:08] Beachwood and Metallark in regards to
[13:12] this meeting unlike the last meetings we
[13:16] had. The postings were placed all the
[13:19] way down Metallark.
[13:22] This is going to affect uh the middle of
[13:24] Metallark, all of those housing uh that
[13:28] development. So, I think that the um the
[13:31] notices should be there should be more
[13:33] notices for the next meeting. So, that's
[13:35] that's what I would like to see. My
[13:38] concerns going back to my concerns um
[13:41] would be if the workhouse housing
[13:44] remains the same as it was in the
[13:46] original development agreement. This
[13:48] would be less impact on nearby homes.
[13:52] And by going through with agreeing to
[13:54] amendment one, I think it would affect
[13:57] um the the value of the homes uh that u
[14:02] directly is around that area as far as
[14:05] appraisal because the appraisal value if
[14:08] you're going to sell will reflect that
[14:11] work horse house um housing as well. So
[14:15] it it it it should be spread out within
[14:18] the area, the full area other than the 4
[14:21] and 1/2 acres. Um it's just not
[14:24] justifiable what he's asking. Thank you.
[14:30] » Thank you, ma'am.
[14:38] » Yes, sir.
[14:40] » Good evening. Thank you for the
[14:41] opportunity to speak. I live on the
[14:43] corner of Deer Springs.
[14:45] » Name, please.
[14:45] » Uh, good evening. My name is Chris
[14:47] Clemens. I live on the corner of Deer
[14:49] Springs where the supposed new
[14:51] roundabout's going to be going on. And I
[14:53] was just wondering if there's any
[14:54] consideration of the increased traffic
[14:56] and street parking due the increased
[14:58] workforce units are going to be
[14:59] consolidated just into the one small
[15:02] section of the entire into the one small
[15:05] section of the entire project instead of
[15:07] being equally distributed throughout the
[15:09] original project that was as planned.
[15:11] and just concerned backing out of the
[15:13] driveway if there's going to be that
[15:14] much traffic with the roundabout. Is it
[15:17] going to be safe to get out of the
[15:18] driveway and where all these people with
[15:22] the condensed housing are going to be
[15:24] able to park? There's going to be on
[15:25] street parking, off streetet parking,
[15:27] carports.
[15:30] And unfortunately, I just didn't think
[15:31] there was much awareness of what's
[15:32] potentially happening because there
[15:33] wasn't any signage. I had to walk by
[15:36] actually I actually walked by the sign
[15:37] of the meeting three times and didn't
[15:39] even see it. unfortunately and got a
[15:42] postcard in the mail, but that was sent
[15:44] on the 14th and I didn't receive it to
[15:46] the 16th and that was less than 10 days
[15:48] of this meeting. So, I was just hoping
[15:51] if there is going to be another meeting,
[15:52] there might be an opportunity for more
[15:53] people to be able to know what's
[15:56] potentially happening.
[15:58] Appreciate that. Thank you.
[16:01] » Thank you, sir.
[16:02] » Thank you.
[16:07] Looking in the audience, any other
[16:10] comments?
[16:12] Okay, seeing none. U Marcy, any callers?
[16:16] » No callers.
[16:17] » Okay. Okay, Warren, then uh we'll
[16:20] continue this.
[16:21] » Yeah, so this item's continued. Um it
[16:23] does need to be renoticed. We understand
[16:26] um the comments we heard about the the
[16:28] noticing issue and some of these other
[16:29] comments are useful information. We'll
[16:31] make sure that's conveyed to the
[16:32] developer as well. So, thank you. We can
[16:35] move on to the next item.
[16:36] » Okay. I believe Commissioner Koger, did
[16:38] you have a Do we need a motion?
[16:39] » Uh, I don't do We don't need a motion to
[16:42] postpone it or do we?
[16:43] » Yeah, we should have done that. Let's do
[16:44] that right now.
[16:45] » Yeah, we want to do that. Okay. Um, I'll
[16:47] take a motion to post postpone item
[16:49] number one, Beachwood Specific Plan
[16:51] Development Agreement Amendment.
[16:53] » So, moved. Can I get a second?
[16:56] » I'll second it.
[16:57] » So, seconded. Uh, roll call, please.
[17:00] Who is the second? [clears throat]
[17:03] » Marlo.
[17:04] » Marlo.
[17:07] » Commissioner Kogler.
[17:08] » Hi.
[17:08] » Commissioner Marlo.
[17:09] » Hi.
[17:10] » Mr. Broden.
[17:11] » Hi.
[17:11] » Mr. Connelly.
[17:12] » I.
[17:13] » Commissioner Neil.
[17:14] » I.
[17:15] » Commissioner Christensen.
[17:16] » Hi.
[17:16] » Chairperson Kar Rubius.
[17:18] » I.
[17:18] » Motion passes.
[17:20] » Okay. Thank you. Moving on to item two,
[17:23] development plan 25-15 for the Highland
[17:26] Senior Affordable Housing Development.
[17:29] Is there staff presentation?
[17:42] Thank you, Chairperson Kov Rubius.
[17:47] Um, so as you said, the next project is
[17:50] uh for a a 100% affordable project uh
[17:53] located at uh 298 Nibckt Road. We've
[17:56] been calling it the Highlands Senior
[17:57] Affordable uh Apartments.
[18:01] So location, um like I said, 298 NibLick
[18:04] Road. This is uh just east of South
[18:06] River Road on Nibck Road. Uh you can see
[18:08] a few landmarks there. Walmart in the
[18:10] bottom left corner, Albertson's in the
[18:12] top left corner, Kennedy Club down there
[18:14] towards the middle bottom. Um, so this
[18:16] is as you climb up Nimble Road from
[18:18] South River Road, there's a vacant
[18:19] parcel. Um, it's it's got some slope to
[18:22] it. Uh, there's uh we'll talk about some
[18:24] of the site features in the next slide.
[18:28] So, the site is uh just over two acres
[18:30] in size. Uh, there is a jurisdictional
[18:33] creek that runs through the property. um
[18:35] this project actually completely avoids
[18:37] um any impacts to that creek. There's
[18:39] also an open space easement that was
[18:41] created by a previous parcel map. Um the
[18:44] the open space easement spans from um
[18:46] both the property that we're talking
[18:48] about this evening and then onto the
[18:50] property to the south which uh is part
[18:51] of the Highlands commercial center uh
[18:53] there where Highlands Church is there at
[18:55] the bottom of the screen. Um and so this
[18:57] is an open space easement. No
[18:58] development, no grading is allowed in
[19:00] this green area. Um it is largely to
[19:03] protect that creek and then also um to
[19:06] uh protect the oak trees. There is in
[19:08] addition a pedestrian bike and
[19:09] pedestrian path. Um I referred to it as
[19:12] the Highlands path in the staff report.
[19:14] Um my understanding is the uh high
[19:16] school cross country team refers it to
[19:18] that. I don't know if it has a a more
[19:19] official title. Um the property is in
[19:22] the regional commercial zoning district.
[19:24] That is a a strictly commercial zone.
[19:27] However, uh the um mixeduse overlay has
[19:30] been applied to this project in 2020 as
[19:33] a part of the um housing element update.
[19:36] Uh the uh mixeduse overlay was applied
[19:38] to the site as were 20 surplus uh
[19:41] surplus density units uh were allocated
[19:44] to the site by the city council. So in
[19:46] 2020, the city council decided that this
[19:48] was an appropriate place for residential
[19:50] for a residential development. Um and
[19:52] they did allocate 20 residential units
[19:55] to the site.
[19:57] So, the project that we're here to
[19:59] consider this evening um is, as I said,
[20:01] a 100% uh rentrestricted affordable
[20:05] project. Uh the uh project will be
[20:07] limited to seniors over 55 years of age.
[20:10] They will be um uh no more than 30 to
[20:13] 60% of what's called the AMI, the
[20:16] average Oh, I got myself into this.
[20:18] Average median income. Um and so uh they
[20:21] by state law are um they have uh they
[20:25] are entitled to an 80% density bonus and
[20:28] five concessions per state law.
[20:30] Concessions are uh forgivenesses
[20:32] essentially for development standards
[20:34] that will reduce the the cost and make
[20:36] it more feasible for a developer to to
[20:38] build affordable units. Obviously
[20:40] they're going to be getting less rent
[20:42] over time. And so the idea is to
[20:44] incentivize these developments and um to
[20:46] make them more affordable for the
[20:48] developer. Um so as I said they are um
[20:51] eligible for an 80% density bonus. The
[20:54] applicant is requesting a 50% density
[20:56] bonus. So they are uh looking to have 30
[20:58] residential units on the site. The units
[21:01] would be um and there's the open space
[21:03] easement. That's that animation there.
[21:06] Um there is one building proposed on the
[21:08] site. It's a three-story building.
[21:10] Inside that building there would be 25
[21:12] one-bedroom units and five two-bedroom
[21:14] units. Um the applicant is requesting
[21:17] five concessions which they are entitled
[21:19] to by state law. The first would allow
[21:22] the building to be taller than what's
[21:24] allowed in the zoning district. Uh the
[21:26] second would allow the foundation
[21:28] height. We in our hillside uh grading
[21:30] standards, we have limitations on how uh
[21:32] tall exposed foundations can be. And so
[21:35] this project uh requests a concession
[21:37] for uh how tall that foundation height
[21:39] is. In addition, there's a request for a
[21:42] parking reduction, a request to reduce
[21:44] the amount of shade that needs to be um
[21:46] provided to that parking area, and then
[21:49] also a reduction in the amount of open
[21:51] space. I think something to keep in mind
[21:53] as we go through this project is uh that
[21:55] this is a senior project. So, the folks
[21:57] who are living here are, you know, more
[21:59] mature individuals and uh over 55 in gen
[22:02] over 55. Um and so uh um like I said
[22:06] more in general more mature um uh
[22:08] population.
[22:11] So uh the first concession is about
[22:13] building height. So um in the regional
[22:15] commercial zoning district maximum
[22:17] height of 32 feet are allowed. Um the
[22:20] building from the foundation the
[22:22] finished floor to the top of the
[22:23] building is uh uh 37 1/2 ft tall. Um the
[22:27] way we measure height though is to take
[22:28] the average uh from where the building
[22:30] touches the ground from the the lowest
[22:32] point to the highest point and then we
[22:34] take so the average of that to the
[22:35] highest point of the building. So the
[22:37] red line on the right is actually how
[22:39] the zoning code would um describe the
[22:42] height of this building which is uh 44
[22:44] feet and 7 and 12 in. The fire
[22:47] department has analyzed this building.
[22:49] We've got other buildings in town that
[22:50] are taller than this building. Um the
[22:52] fire department can fight a fire here.
[22:54] they can respond to emergencies. It just
[22:56] happens to be taller than what's allowed
[22:58] in this commercial zone. Um you'll
[23:00] notice we're looking um uh in the top
[23:02] right at that site plan, you can see
[23:04] more or less where we're looking at this
[23:05] building. So this is we're looking from
[23:07] Niblick Road at the building. Um the the
[23:10] the building will you the most of what
[23:12] you'll see from the building the massing
[23:14] of the building from N Neibuk Road will
[23:16] be that shorter elevation the 37 uh feet
[23:18] 6 inches just a small portion of the
[23:20] building um is going to be that taller
[23:22] that taller height uh that will uh be
[23:24] somewhat hidden by the hillside.
[23:28] So the second concession that is
[23:30] requested is for the exposed foundation
[23:32] height. Um the exposed foundation
[23:35] basically below the finished floor. The
[23:37] average height of that foundation is 11
[23:40] feet and 8 in. Um 9 ft is what is
[23:43] allowed by the code the average height.
[23:45] So this is taller than what would be
[23:46] allowed, but you can see in the site
[23:48] plan up to the top right that that um
[23:50] that elevation does not face a street.
[23:52] It faces the oak tree. So this is going
[23:54] to be an elevation that's largely hidden
[23:56] from public view. In addition, you'll
[23:58] notice that that foundation um has uh
[24:01] some steps [clears throat] front,
[24:02] forward, and back. This is not a a solid
[24:04] plane um where the building just has a
[24:07] you know, immense massive feel because
[24:08] of a a large foundation wall. Um and so
[24:11] this is the second concession that the
[24:13] applicant is requesting. Um the second
[24:15] of five that they are entitled to.
[24:19] The third and fourth concessions are
[24:21] related to parking. um 54 parking spaces
[24:24] would be required for a market rate uh
[24:26] project of this size uh for the number
[24:29] of one and two-bedroom units and the
[24:30] guest parking. Um as you'll recall,
[24:32] there are 30 units proposed and there
[24:35] are 38 parking spaces. Um uh um the
[24:38] applicant is proposing 38 parking
[24:40] spaces. So this would be one of their
[24:42] concessions. Um I I believe when the
[24:44] applicant is um uh comes to speak,
[24:46] she'll provide some um some parking
[24:49] statistics. the uh Pastor Robus Housing
[24:52] Authority and the Affordable Housing um
[24:54] development corporation operate two uh
[24:57] senior uh apartment complexes in town.
[25:00] One recently finished the Riverwalk
[25:02] Terrace which is in the Walmart center.
[25:04] So they've got some um really up-to-date
[25:06] parking data on what these projects uh
[25:08] the parking demand actually is for these
[25:11] projects. Um they've also the Pastor
[25:12] Robels Housing Authority has been
[25:14] operating the Cetaughter Apartments up
[25:16] on Park Street near the Oak Park um
[25:18] apartments for many years and so they've
[25:20] got some longerterm parking data for
[25:22] that project as well. Um so those are
[25:24] both uh deed restricted uh um senior
[25:27] housing projects we have here in Pastor
[25:29] Robels. We have real data on how much
[25:30] parking is required and so this is the
[25:33] amount of parking that the applicant um
[25:35] feels that uh the project will demand
[25:37] and that is their request. Um the fourth
[25:39] concession, the uh municipal code
[25:41] requires shade trees in our parking
[25:44] lots. Um they are meant to provide 25%
[25:47] shade at at five years. Um this project
[25:50] uh as the trees are proposed would
[25:52] provide 17% uh shade at maturity, which
[25:56] is longer than five years. Um the
[25:58] applicant did point out that the
[25:59] building will shade um that the kind of
[26:02] more eastern um parking area uh you know
[26:05] from a lot of the afternoon sun because
[26:07] it is a relatively tall building.
[26:11] So the fifth and final concession is
[26:12] related to open space. Uh multifamily
[26:15] projects in the um mixeduse uh overlay
[26:19] are required to have 100 square feet of
[26:21] private open space per unit and 100
[26:24] square feet of common open space per
[26:26] unit. This project uh uh provides about
[26:28] half of that space. Um each unit has a
[26:31] private patio. They're about 50 square
[26:33] feet in size. And then there is some
[26:35] shared space uh in the darker green
[26:37] color. Uh there's an indoor um uh
[26:41] meeting room and and reading room. And
[26:43] then there's an outdoor patio uh where
[26:45] the the the uh residents will be able to
[26:48] uh congregate and and recreate. Um as
[26:50] I've mentioned several times, this is a
[26:52] senior project. And so, um, while the
[26:55] open space is, uh, reduced, uh, this is
[26:59] an older population, it's also, um,
[27:01] close to the bike and pedestrian path to
[27:03] the south of the creek, um, relatively
[27:05] close to Larry Moore Park and also the
[27:07] river, uh, the riverwalk along the
[27:09] Selenus River.
[27:13] So, now jumping into the elevations of
[27:14] the building, this is the front
[27:16] elevation that uh, that faces north. Um,
[27:18] is somewhat oriented to to Niblick Road.
[27:21] Um, you can see this is a well
[27:22] articulated building. A lot of window uh
[27:25] window and and uh balcony openings um uh
[27:29] and different uh sighting materials.
[27:30] There's both shingles and horizontal
[27:32] sighting on the on the sides.
[27:36] This is a look at the side elevations.
[27:38] We've already seen the elevation on the
[27:40] right side. That's the west that kind of
[27:41] faces Nibl Road. uh the building uh the
[27:44] elevation on the left would face to the
[27:46] east and would not be visible from uh
[27:48] very many vantage points offsite. And
[27:51] then finally, this is al we've also seen
[27:53] this elevation. This is the re rear
[27:55] elevation. Um this will face the oak
[27:58] trees along the creek. And so this isn't
[27:59] an elevation that that will really be
[28:01] visible from um from offsite for the
[28:03] most part.
[28:07] Colors and materials. uh the applicant
[28:09] has, you know, it's a relatively muted
[28:11] uh attractive mix of colors, some uh
[28:14] browns and and tans and then the doors
[28:16] would be blue in color. Um and so um
[28:19] don't have much to share on this, you
[28:21] know, but this is the color scheme that
[28:22] we would we we will expect.
[28:27] So, uh with the 2024 zoning code update,
[28:29] the planning commission made
[28:30] recommendation to council to adopt
[28:32] objective design standards. Um and so
[28:35] the way our objective design standards
[28:37] work are depending on the size of the
[28:39] building both the number of units and
[28:41] the length of or you know the the size
[28:43] the literal uh uh width of the building
[28:45] there are a number of of standards that
[28:48] have to be met and so the standards are
[28:50] broken into different tiers and then
[28:52] depending on the size of the project um
[28:54] the num it dictates how many of those
[28:57] design standards you have to meet. The
[28:59] idea is with smaller buildings, they
[29:00] don't tend to be quite as massive if
[29:03] they aren't the um the most artic art
[29:05] articulated building or the most or
[29:07] ornate buildings. Um they're smaller in
[29:09] scale and so they're you know uh they
[29:12] are uh less visible from offsite. So
[29:14] bigger buildings have to provide more of
[29:16] the uh the standards. So for a project
[29:19] of this site of size uh they have to
[29:21] provide all of the tier one standards
[29:23] and those are things like uh the
[29:24] orientation of the front porch in the
[29:26] building. uh they have to provide window
[29:28] openings of a specific percentage 15% in
[29:31] this case. They have to break up walls
[29:33] so we don't have large massive walls
[29:35] with uh no articulation. Um they've got
[29:38] to provide in the tier 2 um uh standards
[29:41] they've got to provide two strategies.
[29:43] You can see them listed there. Um the
[29:45] applicant is providing balconies and
[29:46] some vertical wall elements. Um, I'm not
[29:49] going to belabor going through each of
[29:50] these, but suffice to say that the
[29:52] project uh meets uh uh each of its
[29:55] objective design standards.
[30:03] Um the project is on a site that has
[30:05] quite a bit of slope and so I wanted to
[30:07] go through some of the um the sections
[30:09] the the uh the uh um the grading and how
[30:12] the project will look um uh as after
[30:15] it's constructed. So in the bottom right
[30:17] we see the grading plan and then um I'm
[30:19] going to hone in on this section here.
[30:21] So this red line is cutting through the
[30:23] building in the parking lot and we're
[30:25] going to look like we're going to look
[30:26] at what that grading will look like. Um
[30:28] so here we see on the left um we're
[30:30] looking at a cross-section through the
[30:32] building. Um in blue is the is the
[30:35] building. Um you can see that there is
[30:37] quite a bit of um there is some cut. Uh
[30:40] there is a maximum cut of 15 feet in
[30:42] height to create the parking lot. there
[30:45] is a um a fill of 14 feet in height. Um
[30:49] those those are really restrained though
[30:51] to where development is occurring. There
[30:53] aren't many uh fill slopes. Um they're
[30:55] using retaining walls to really restrain
[30:57] how much grading needs to occur um to
[31:00] provide these 30 units. Um you'll also
[31:02] notice that the site uh is pretty
[31:04] balanced. Uh the amount of cut and fill
[31:06] are pretty close. They will need to
[31:08] import a little bit of soil. Uh I think
[31:10] it looks like about 300 cubic yards, a
[31:12] little less than that. um but relatively
[31:15] balanced site.
[31:17] I will also note uh on the right uh the
[31:20] retaining walls shown there in yellow uh
[31:22] those are each six-ft retaining walls
[31:24] and those do meet the maximum height uh
[31:26] and separation for retaining walls. So
[31:29] those uh uh retaining walls do meet our
[31:31] standards. Um when we jump into
[31:33] landscape uh um requirements, um you'll
[31:36] see that staff is recommending um some
[31:38] trailing plants, possibly rosemary at
[31:40] the top of that upper retaining wall to
[31:41] kind of break up its appearance. Um and
[31:44] so those are the retaining walls I'll be
[31:45] talking about when we get to
[31:46] landscaping.
[31:48] Looking at another um uh section. So now
[31:50] we're looking through the that kind of
[31:52] upper parking lot looking back towards
[31:55] the building. Um this section just
[31:57] misses the building. So, you can see
[31:58] that there'll be a fill slope between
[32:00] the building and the parking lot. Um,
[32:02] and some fill there. I think I've got an
[32:04] animation. That's where the little patio
[32:06] is. And there is some fill. Oops. Below
[32:08] it, it looks like my animation didn't
[32:10] work. But um, so again, there is some
[32:12] fill, but it really is constrained. You
[32:14] can see on the um
[32:17] um on the left is where the sidewalk is
[32:19] located. The building will be pretty
[32:21] close to at the same grade with the with
[32:23] the with the uh with Nibck Road and with
[32:25] the adjacent sidewalk.
[32:29] And finally, uh there is also a section
[32:32] uh provided through the the long parking
[32:34] lot and then closer to the driveway
[32:36] entrance. Um you can see there uh there
[32:38] is some fill um but it is uh compared to
[32:41] the size of that parking lot and the
[32:42] slope of the lot. It is relatively uh uh
[32:45] um it is a relatively small amount of
[32:48] fill slope that we'll be seeing um when
[32:50] this project is complete.
[32:54] Um jumping into the landscape plan. This
[32:55] is the plan that the applicant had uh
[32:57] had brought to the the development
[32:59] review committee. Um one of the
[33:01] questions staff had for the DRC was is
[33:03] this adequate landscaping. We do have
[33:05] standards in our municipal code that
[33:06] require unused areas, yards that don't,
[33:09] you know, aren't covered by parking lots
[33:11] and buildings and so forth or hidden
[33:13] behind fences that they are meant to be
[33:15] landscaped. Um and the the development
[33:17] review committee felt like it would be
[33:18] appropriate to have some oak tree
[33:20] plantings in the more natural areas that
[33:22] aren't going to get formal landscaping
[33:24] in order to comply with that landscaping
[33:26] requirement. Um staff prepared this uh
[33:29] this uh exhibit uh that is provided in
[33:31] the staff report. This is just to try to
[33:34] um capture what we heard from the DRC.
[33:36] Um, and so there is a condition of
[33:38] approval that would require, I believe
[33:39] it's 15 oak trees to be planted in
[33:42] clusters and kind of natural clusters on
[33:44] the undeveloped portions of the lot.
[33:46] It'll help to soften the appearance of
[33:48] those and be relatively easy to
[33:49] maintain. I mentioned um that there are
[33:52] some retaining walls along the east side
[33:53] of that eastern uh uh um parking area.
[33:56] And so you'll see that the trailing
[33:58] plants are recommended above that upper
[34:00] retaining wall. And then there was a
[34:01] little landscape planter adjacent to the
[34:04] garbage enclosure that should also be
[34:05] included in the landscape plan.
[34:09] Um, here's a quick look at the floor
[34:11] plans. As I said, this is a mix of one
[34:13] and twobedroom units. So, this is the
[34:15] first floor. There is an area where it's
[34:18] a residence center. There's an outdoor
[34:19] deck that uh points towards the uh oak
[34:22] woodland. They'll provide a nice space
[34:24] and there's a reading room. So, there is
[34:26] um some nice indoor shared recreation
[34:28] space. There's also a laundry room on
[34:31] the first floor. The second and third
[34:33] floors are relatively similar. Um, and
[34:35] so there is um there's no common open
[34:38] space on the second and third floors,
[34:39] but there is laundry on each floor. And
[34:42] so there will be uh laundry facilities
[34:44] for for um residents on each floor.
[34:49] Um there was a pre previous iteration of
[34:51] this project that was approved I believe
[34:53] in 2021. Um that project was 20 uh units
[34:57] that would have been market rate units.
[34:59] Um at that time the project included a a
[35:02] secondary driveway that would have
[35:04] required alterations to the creek. It
[35:07] would have required uh the removal of an
[35:08] oak tree and it would have also um a lot
[35:11] of grading, biological impacts, an oak
[35:14] tree removal and then also would have
[35:15] been a somewhat awkward egress um that
[35:18] would have gone through the Highlands
[35:19] Church parking lot. the applicant had
[35:21] the right to do that, but it was a
[35:22] fairly awkward uh solution. This project
[35:25] would eliminate that uh that secondary
[35:27] egress and instead uh it will be
[35:30] restricting uh um left turns in into and
[35:34] out of the site. So to enter this site,
[35:36] you would have to be traveling eastbound
[35:38] and make a right turn into the project.
[35:40] When you're uh exiting the site, you
[35:42] have to make a right turn. I think I've
[35:44] got um some um animations there. If
[35:47] you're leaving the site, you need to
[35:48] make a right turn and head east. Um, as
[35:51] I've stated multiple times, this is a
[35:53] senior population and so we hope that
[35:54] we'll see good compliance with these
[35:56] rules. Um, but there will be a median.
[35:58] You see it in yellow there. Um, that
[36:00] will be um, [clears throat]
[36:02] uh, required to be installed. It will
[36:04] restrict movements for cars. Um, there
[36:06] is a requirement that the median be
[36:08] mountable for fire trucks, garbage
[36:09] trucks, big trucks that need to come on
[36:11] to the site and provide emergency and
[36:13] other services to the site. But regular
[36:16] cars will have to um make right turns to
[36:18] to get inside and out of the project.
[36:22] And that's due to sight distance. There
[36:24] is uh you're of course climbing NibL
[36:26] Road here and it starts to turn uh off
[36:28] to the uh kind of southeast or more west
[36:31] I suppose it is. Um uh and so it's uh
[36:35] there is limited sight distance and so
[36:37] for folks entering and exiting the site
[36:39] this is to ensure safe movements.
[36:43] Um we did receive two public comments,
[36:46] written public comments. Um the
[36:47] [clears throat] first had a list of 11
[36:49] items. Um the second uh uh comment was
[36:52] uh exclusively about parking, which is
[36:54] the second comment that the uh written
[36:56] comment u made. I've uh got them listed
[36:59] here. Um and so we can um dive in as
[37:01] much as the planning commission would
[37:03] like to. We've also got the city
[37:04] engineer here this evening and she can
[37:06] explain the the traffic and greeting um
[37:09] better than I have. Um the first public
[37:11] comment was that the entry in egress is
[37:13] flawed and dangerous. We have vetted
[37:15] this with the fire department with the
[37:17] um with our transportation consultant.
[37:20] Um we explored a lot of different
[37:22] options, different ways to provide
[37:24] egress and ingress in this site and and
[37:27] really it's come down to this pork chop
[37:28] and it being the most uh feasible
[37:30] solution. Um and it has been determined
[37:33] by the engineering team that this would
[37:35] be would create safe movements into and
[37:38] out of the site. Um the second uh uh uh
[37:41] um comment was about having inadequate
[37:43] parking. As I mentioned, the second
[37:45] comment letter we got was also about the
[37:47] parking exception. Um the applicant will
[37:50] provide us some parking numbers, but
[37:51] they um I was surprised how low um she
[37:54] she provided the numbers at the
[37:56] development review committee meeting. Um
[37:58] and they're they're they're they're
[38:00] quite low. um and the parking uh rate
[38:03] that that would be expected uh they'll
[38:05] be covered by the the spaces that are
[38:07] provided. But more importantly, state
[38:09] law does say if the applicant requests
[38:11] this concession, they are entitled to
[38:13] this concession. Um the third comment
[38:15] was about excessive grading. I've
[38:17] provided some slides about how the the
[38:19] project has constrained grading to the
[38:22] degree possible. You can see on the
[38:23] right there, this is a sloping site. Uh
[38:26] also constrained um by the oak trees. Uh
[38:29] so there was limited room. uh the
[38:30] applicant kept the building on the some
[38:32] of the least uh steeply sloping part of
[38:35] the lot and um compared to the project
[38:37] that was approved uh five or so years
[38:39] ago um this project actually is quite a
[38:41] bit less grading. The previous project
[38:43] actually was going to lay back that
[38:45] upper hill and um and put some
[38:48] additional structures uh closer to the
[38:50] apartments to the east.
[38:53] Um the uh excuse me the uh public
[38:55] comments uh uh made a a comment about
[38:58] the creek setbacks. Um, this project
[39:00] stays completely outside of the open
[39:02] space easement which was the setbacks
[39:04] that were established for this uh site.
[39:07] Um, the applicant, excuse me, I keep uh
[39:10] misspeaking. The public uh comment um
[39:13] mentioned that storm water runoff has
[39:15] been inadequately addressed. At this
[39:17] time, we do have preliminary storm water
[39:19] um uh calculations um that the
[39:22] engineering team has has uh um reviewed.
[39:25] Um those do get refined as we go into
[39:27] grading and building permits. Um but uh
[39:30] the city engineer has determined that it
[39:32] is feasible to address uh the storm
[39:34] water that will be generated by the
[39:36] project. Um the uh public comment was
[39:39] concerned that there are too many units.
[39:41] As I said, the city council did allocate
[39:43] 20 units to the site and state law says
[39:46] that this applicant is entitled actually
[39:47] to even more units. If they wanted a
[39:49] larger uh density bonus, they could have
[39:52] requested an 80% density bonus. They
[39:54] just they uh develop they designed a
[39:57] project that um got as many units as
[40:00] they possibly could, but it it actually
[40:01] didn't maximize the number that they
[40:03] could uh request. Um the uh public
[40:07] comment uh claimed that the community
[40:09] has been unable or is unable to absorb
[40:11] the all the rental housing that's coming
[40:13] onto the market. I believe the applicant
[40:15] will provide some numbers, but the two
[40:17] uh projects that came online last year,
[40:20] the Riverwalk Terrace and the Sunrise
[40:22] Villas um are entirely uh uh occupied as
[40:26] I understand, those are both um
[40:27] affordable projects and there are long
[40:29] waiting lists to get into those
[40:31] developments. So um uh you know, the
[40:34] city's understanding and the applicant's
[40:35] understanding is that there is is
[40:37] certainly demand for affordable housing
[40:39] in our community. The public comment uh
[40:43] uh uh stated that the um that the the
[40:46] lands might be Native American ancestral
[40:48] lands. As I mentioned, there were um
[40:51] there was a previous project on the
[40:52] site. That project included uh impacts
[40:55] to the creek and so there was a
[40:57] mitigated negative declaration prepared
[40:58] for that project. one of the mitigation
[41:01] measures that um or there was an
[41:03] archaeological report created for that
[41:05] project and the archaeologist found no
[41:08] evidence of of any uh um Native American
[41:11] cultural um artifacts or any impacts
[41:14] there on the site. Um there was a
[41:16] mitigation measure that required a a
[41:18] Native American tribe or an
[41:19] archaeologist to monitor uh ground
[41:22] disturbance. That mitigation measure was
[41:24] inadvertently left out of the the the
[41:27] proposed resolution. So staff will be
[41:28] recommending that that requirement to
[41:30] monitor will be readded to the uh to
[41:33] this project um and to address any
[41:35] potential impacts to um Native American
[41:37] cultural uh artifacts. Um the applicant
[41:40] or excuse me the p the public comment
[41:43] mentioned that the project would be
[41:44] unsightely from Highway 101. Um I've got
[41:46] some slides we'll jump into um and the
[41:48] the next slide that try to give an idea
[41:51] of what the what the uh this the project
[41:53] would look like from um the freeway.
[41:55] It's a little hard to assess, but um we
[41:57] can certainly look at that. Um the uh
[42:01] project actually eliminates all oak tree
[42:03] removals. There will be no oak trees
[42:04] removed as a part of this project. The
[42:06] previous iteration did remove one oak
[42:08] tree. Um and actually the project will
[42:10] be planting at least 15 oak trees on the
[42:12] site. Um so there'll actually be a net
[42:15] benefit in oak trees. And then there was
[42:18] a claim that the um the view that there
[42:20] was a viewshed that's a protected
[42:21] viewshed to the south of the site. As I
[42:23] mentioned, there is an open space
[42:24] easement, and that uh easement is uh
[42:26] both to protect the oak trees and the
[42:28] the seasonal creek. It also houses the
[42:30] pedestrian path that's to the south of
[42:32] the creek. Um there was no viewshed uh
[42:35] um uh limit on that. There was no
[42:37] protection of the view. Um and the
[42:39] portion of the of the lot not in that
[42:41] open space uh was left for development.
[42:45] So, this next slide uh is intended to um
[42:48] looks like I've got an animation I
[42:50] didn't intend. um is to to give an idea
[42:52] of the um relative height. The the
[42:55] comment came from uh one of the owners
[42:57] from the Alder Creek condominiums. Um
[42:59] this project would have a finished floor
[43:01] of uh at 760 ft. The building is 37 and
[43:06] 1/2 ft tall from that finished floor. So
[43:07] you can see in blue that's um the
[43:09] maximum height of the building will be
[43:11] at 797 and 1/2 ft. the Alder Creek
[43:14] Apartments approximately at 781 feet
[43:18] judging by uh the the the topo lines and
[43:20] the grading plan. So, um uh the roof of
[43:24] the building will be, you know, a little
[43:25] taller than the the foundation of Alder
[43:28] Creek. Alder Creek's about it's a
[43:29] two-story building. I don't know how
[43:31] tall those buildings are, but largely
[43:33] the uh this building will actually be
[43:35] below um the Alder Creek uh apartments.
[43:38] Um the red line, the red dotted line is
[43:41] definitely not to scale. The width of
[43:42] the the horizontal uh dimension is not
[43:45] to scale um in this this image, but the
[43:48] uh vertical scale is is to uh to scale.
[43:55] This is my attempt. So this is a Google
[43:57] Street view. I didn't go out on onto the
[43:59] freeway exit. Um but this is a Google
[44:01] Street view so we can kind of get an
[44:03] idea. Um the few uh points of interest
[44:06] you can see to the far right that's the
[44:07] Kennedy Club building. Um a a building
[44:10] that sits you know close to this
[44:12] building. Um and it is it is a
[44:14] prominently uh visible uh building from
[44:16] the freeway. Um I don't know the name of
[44:18] the condos that are at the top of Oak
[44:20] Hill but that's them there um towards
[44:22] the middle of the image. the Alder Creek
[44:24] apartments there are pointed to and then
[44:27] the the site where Highlands will uh be
[44:29] located and we've already seen they'll
[44:31] be lower than the Alder Creek uh
[44:32] apartments by a bit but they're there to
[44:35] the left. So certainly they will add to
[44:37] what you can see on the hillside. Um but
[44:39] there are a lot of visual visual impacts
[44:42] that that exist. Um
[44:45] so here's a look at the street view of
[44:47] the actual site. You can see the
[44:48] Highlands Church there on the right and
[44:50] then the Alder Creek apartments are
[44:51] there on the far left.
[44:55] So, um, jumping into what's in the
[44:57] resolution, um, there are a, you know, a
[44:59] laundry list of conditions of approval.
[45:01] These are just summaries and they don't
[45:03] include all the conditions of approval.
[45:05] Those are in the draft resolution in
[45:06] your staff report this evening. The
[45:08] sixth and seventh uh conditions of
[45:10] approval require um affordability
[45:13] agreements that are related to um
[45:15] restricting these units to uh low-income
[45:17] households. Those in the 30 to 60% um
[45:21] AMI, the uh average um I keep I
[45:25] shouldn't put myself in that position
[45:26] where I have to think about what the AMI
[45:28] is is the average um mean income. I
[45:31] think I've got that wrong. Um but the
[45:34] the project will be required to go into
[45:36] agreements with the city that the units
[45:37] will be um affordable for 55 years. Um
[45:41] there is a requirement that the project
[45:43] comply with the city's um new dark sky
[45:45] lighting requirements. Um they'll have
[45:48] to provide adequate laundry facilities
[45:50] for the project. Uh retaining walls will
[45:52] need to be mason mason masonry material
[45:55] uh textured concrete or similar. Um we
[45:58] discussed the landscaping uh that they
[46:00] need to include 15 native trees that
[46:02] will be uh scattered on the site. Um
[46:05] some trailing plants above the retaining
[46:06] wall and landscaping adjacent to the
[46:08] garbage enclosure. They will need to
[46:10] plant some additional street trees. Um
[46:12] there's uh um some existing landscaping
[46:15] and irrigation that is maintained by the
[46:16] city, but it's got some gaps and so um
[46:19] conditions 13 and 14 would require that
[46:21] landscaping and irrigation to be uh
[46:24] repaired. And then um the applicant does
[46:26] intend to put some signs on the site. We
[46:28] didn't get details of those. So when
[46:30] those come in um with building permits,
[46:32] we'll bring those back to the DRC for
[46:33] their review.
[46:36] Um the then this slide here has some of
[46:39] the engineering conditions. There is a
[46:41] long condition related to circulation.
[46:43] We talked about the fact that the turn
[46:45] movements will need to be um limited.
[46:47] They'll need to make some ADA
[46:48] improvements and some signage and um
[46:51] striping and so forth. Um, they will
[46:53] also need to replace the median
[46:55] landscaping and they'll need to provide
[46:56] a new surface for the driveway entrance,
[46:58] the kind of turn pocket that enters the
[47:00] site. As I said, this is not a
[47:02] comprehensive list that is there in your
[47:04] draft resolution.
[47:07] Um, there are findings that the planning
[47:09] commission needs to make. A lot of them
[47:11] are about the project being consistent
[47:12] with the goals and policies of our of
[47:14] our city, the general plan, the zoning
[47:16] ordinance, um the uh any other plans and
[47:20] and standards of the city. Um there are
[47:22] condition or excuse me, findings
[47:24] provided in the resolution uh that the
[47:26] the planning commission can use to
[47:27] approve the project. In addition, um
[47:30] you're finding that the project
[47:31] accommodates the aesthetic quality of
[47:33] the city and that it's compatible with
[47:35] the existing scenic and environmental
[47:37] resources.
[47:40] Um the project uh staff is recommending
[47:42] that the project be found exempt from
[47:44] environmental review as a class 32
[47:46] categorical exemption. These are
[47:48] exemptions for infill development. They
[47:50] have to be on sites less than five
[47:51] acres. They have to be substantially
[47:53] surrounded by other urban uses and not
[47:55] have any um significant impacts to
[47:57] things like traffic, noise, air quality,
[47:59] and water quality. So there's a what's
[48:02] called a notice of um exemption that's
[48:05] provided in the resolution that goes
[48:06] through all the reasons why this project
[48:08] is exempt from SQUA.
[48:12] As always, the planning commission has
[48:13] options. The first would be to approve
[48:15] the project by adopting the draft
[48:17] resolution. Um uh that and the project
[48:19] would be approved based on findings and
[48:21] subject to the conditions of approval.
[48:23] Uh the planning commission could approve
[48:24] the project with modifications uh to the
[48:27] conditions of approval or to the project
[48:29] itself by adopting the u by amending and
[48:32] adopting the draft resolution. If you
[48:34] feel you need more information, you can
[48:35] refer the project back to the DRC or to
[48:37] staff. Um or you could deny the project
[48:40] by adopting findings of denial. Um
[48:45] uh staff is making a recommendation for
[48:47] option two, which would be to approve
[48:49] the project. We are recommending a an
[48:51] additional condition of approval that
[48:53] would require monitoring of uh grading
[48:55] of the site. Uh would be u a a
[48:59] professional archaeologist would need to
[49:00] help create a cultural resource
[49:02] monitoring plan. And then there would be
[49:04] uh folks on site to make sure that
[49:07] nothing is uncovered during during
[49:08] grading and construction.
[49:11] And I believe that is uh that ends
[49:13] staff's report.
[49:16] » Thank you Katie. That was a lot. Um,
[49:20] we'll get there. So, before before we
[49:23] get into questions, um, would the
[49:25] applicant like to make some comments?
[49:28] Yeah, absolutely.
[49:38] » Hi, good evening. My name is Lori Doyle.
[49:40] I'm executive vice president of
[49:41] Affordable Housing Development
[49:43] Corporation. Um, we are the proposed
[49:45] co-developer of the Highlands 298 Nibble
[49:48] property that you're seeing in front of
[49:49] you this evening. We're also partnered
[49:51] with the Pastor Robels Housing Authority
[49:53] and their new executive director, Nick
[49:55] Rasmmanson, is here with me tonight as
[49:56] well. Um, we have I' I've met with a few
[50:00] of you in the DRC meetings, but um, we
[50:03] have been a part of this community for a
[50:05] better part of a decade. We were uh
[50:07] partners with the housing authority for
[50:09] Oak Park 3 and four as well as Sunrise
[50:12] Villas and Riverwalk Terrace which Katie
[50:14] talked about earlier. Um most of these
[50:16] projects were um I say um a majority of
[50:19] the project uh but all those projects I
[50:21] mentioned were made possible because of
[50:23] the cities both are political and their
[50:25] funding support um of the city of Paser
[50:28] Robas. So it was a partnership between
[50:30] my organization as well as the housing
[50:31] authority and the city as well. We
[50:33] always call the city our partner. Um, as
[50:36] Katie mentioned, um, we were
[50:37] recommended, um, unanimously by the DRC.
[50:40] So, we're here for your approval of our
[50:42] final entitlements for this project. Um,
[50:44] I did want to mention two, uh, I think
[50:46] I'm going to answer two questions, um,
[50:49] regarding parking and, um, absorption of
[50:51] affordable housing. So, I'll start with
[50:53] parking. Um, I'll start with Riverwalk
[50:56] Terrace, which I think most of you are
[50:57] probably most familiar with. And this is
[50:58] kind of our sort of phase two of
[51:00] Riverwalk because it's just across South
[51:02] River Road from um the 79 units that
[51:05] Riverwalk Terrace is. So that property
[51:08] has um 79 units and 82 parking parking
[51:13] stalls that are dedicated to that
[51:16] property. And um we do what we call like
[51:19] parking studies, parking counts. So we
[51:20] go out, we survey how many cars are out
[51:22] there. We we actually our managers
[51:24] become very close with our residents
[51:25] anyway. So we kind of know who's driving
[51:27] what and we do surveys like during the
[51:29] day, during the weekend, during the
[51:30] night to figure out how many cars are
[51:32] actually on site. So there's about 50%
[51:34] of those um spots are empty all the
[51:36] time. Um so out of the 82 spots, there's
[51:39] only about 40 or so that are actually
[51:41] full all the time. Um the housing
[51:44] authority is also a part of the CED
[51:46] daughter pro project which is um over
[51:50] off of I forget what number street it
[51:51] is, but it's south of Oak Park one. Um,
[51:54] so over on that on the north side of
[51:55] town and that has 40 units total and
[51:59] they only have 34 spaces. Granted, that
[52:01] project was approved a long time ago and
[52:03] they're about at the same type of um
[52:06] open or um resident use [clears throat]
[52:08] or residents that have cars and guests
[52:10] that have cars. So about 50% of the
[52:12] stalls are open most of the time. Um,
[52:14] and then here we're actually, as you
[52:16] know, we're proposing 30 units and 38
[52:19] spaces. So, it's actually more than both
[52:20] of those um both of those projects that
[52:23] I just referenced and we would expect to
[52:24] have the same type of um parking
[52:27] situation there. So, I operate um
[52:29] affordable housing all over the state of
[52:30] California. I'm just giving you examples
[52:32] here because it makes most sense to you
[52:34] all. Um but this is what we're seeing
[52:36] throughout our senior communities
[52:37] throughout the state of California as
[52:38] well. So, it's about 50% um have cars in
[52:42] 55 and older communities. And in family
[52:44] communities like Sunrise Villas, that's
[52:46] about 1.5 cars to one. So just for a
[52:49] little bit of perspective. And then
[52:51] relative to the weight list and the
[52:53] absorption of affordable housing, I
[52:54] think we're all aware that we we need
[52:56] more affordable housing. We need as much
[52:58] as we can get. Um Riverwalk Terrace,
[53:00] again, I'll compare the seniors. Um that
[53:03] property was fully occupied within a
[53:05] weekend. Um as soon as we opened it, all
[53:08] 79 people wanted to move in one day. We
[53:10] had to spread it out. So, we had to make
[53:11] it 3 or 4 days so it wasn't overwhelming
[53:13] for everybody. That property has an
[53:15] almost 700 person waiting list right
[53:17] now. So, we are um expected to utilize
[53:21] that wait list when we open this
[53:23] property as well. Sunrise Villas, I know
[53:25] this is a big one. This is family. Um
[53:27] there's 1500 people on our waiting list
[53:29] there. And Oak Park, um three and four,
[53:31] which I'm involved in, have over 700
[53:33] people on their weight list. So, those
[53:35] are family projects. But just giving you
[53:37] some perspective, we have no doubt that
[53:39] we will absorb these units very quickly.
[53:42] And um also just to point out as part of
[53:44] our financing mechanism, we have to do a
[53:46] third party market study that they will
[53:48] come in and they will put it in writing
[53:50] as to and they'll they'll do um kind of
[53:53] an audit of all the affordable housing
[53:55] and what's available and the need and
[53:56] they'll put this into into writing for
[53:59] us for our financing um mechanisms that
[54:01] we get from the state. So I think that's
[54:04] um all I have. I'm here for questions.
[54:06] Um Nick is as well. And um yeah, thank
[54:09] you for letting me be up here.
[54:13] » Thank you. All right, if you'll stand by
[54:15] close in case there are questions
[54:16] directly for you.
[54:17] » Thank you.
[54:18] » Um so we'll bring it back to the
[54:19] commission and uh we'll start over here,
[54:22] Commissioner Connley.
[54:27] » Okay. Yeah. Um it was good that you went
[54:30] over the parking situation that it's
[54:32] similar development. It's only 50%.
[54:35] Um I'm wondering how much guest I mean
[54:38] uh staff parking there would be uh for
[54:41] this if if there's staff on on site that
[54:44] could take up some of the 38 parking
[54:47] spaces that are available.
[54:49] » Um the applicant may have more
[54:50] information. One of the units on of the
[54:53] 30 will be a manager's unit and then
[54:55] there are two offices shown but uh one
[54:58] of the like I said one of the the staff
[55:00] will live on site so there'll be one of
[55:01] the 30 apartment tenants. Um but I uh
[55:04] you know there's 38 spots. My
[55:06] understanding is they don't intend to
[55:08] designate spots for any particular
[55:09] person.
[55:11] » Yeah. And also the parking discussion
[55:13] was somewhat good to hear that a similar
[55:16] type of senior living uh isn't full, but
[55:19] I was concerned about overflow parking
[55:22] with guest parking potentially to the
[55:24] Highland church area or parking that's
[55:28] down the grade a little bit. But I I
[55:30] think uh the concern was alleviated with
[55:32] your comments. Uh wanted to ask uh about
[55:36] the the trash enclosure. I know it's a
[55:39] small thing, but I didn't see any
[55:40] architectural treatment for that. I
[55:42] assume it's going to be similar to the
[55:45] to the main building. I saw the location
[55:47] of it.
[55:49] » Yeah. I apologize for not including a
[55:51] slide. It is included in the the the
[55:53] resolution. Um it is um uh there it's
[55:56] block. It is um and I'm the type of
[55:59] block is is is giving me split face.
[56:02] Thank you very much. Split face block is
[56:04] the exterior of the the garbage
[56:05] enclosure.
[56:07] » Um this being a senior living community
[56:11] just for my own education. uh what
[56:14] prevents someone uh that's not a senior,
[56:17] maybe has kids
[56:20] uh maybe under 55 from from uh occupying
[56:25] these these units.
[56:27] » Um as I said, there is an on-site
[56:28] manager. Um Lori, that's probably a
[56:30] better question for you. How how that
[56:32] gets managed?
[56:36] So, in our lease, in the lease that they
[56:38] sign, um there's like affidavit that
[56:41] they have to sign that and obviously we
[56:42] we we check the dates and all that stuff
[56:44] of their year, birth and all that sort
[56:46] of thing. Um there haven't been, again,
[56:48] I I do operate senior um housing
[56:50] throughout California. There's very few
[56:52] instances where um I I've heard people
[56:55] be worried about like grandparents
[56:56] raising children and things like that.
[56:58] That typically doesn't happen in in um
[57:00] in in the communities at least that we
[57:02] operate. Um, and if there was like a
[57:04] long-term like a I don't know, for lack
[57:07] of better terms, a squatter, like a kid
[57:08] squatter or something like that, there's
[57:10] the the manager on site is very aware.
[57:12] Um, as you can imagine, especially with
[57:14] a small project like this, um, the
[57:16] manager will be very um much familiar
[57:19] with everybody and their and their
[57:21] guests and their okay families.
[57:23] » Yeah. I just didn't know how. It's
[57:24] really it'd be a lease violation if
[57:26] there was anything that we found and
[57:27] then we would be able to
[57:29] » I assume that there's a like the oaks
[57:31] and other places have that same concern.
[57:35] » Okay. Mhm.
[57:35] » Um and the only other minor concern is
[57:38] uh I noticed the retaining walls on the
[57:40] top of cuts um may have to have some
[57:44] safety rails and be concerned about the
[57:47] architectural treatment of that as well
[57:49] as we mentioned additional landscaping
[57:52] but staff presented something that I
[57:54] liked on that but the safety rails on
[57:56] the retaining walls might be needed and
[57:58] the architectural treatment of that. So
[58:01] that those are some things that I I'm
[58:04] concerned about. Thank you.
[58:08] » Thank you, sir. Commissioner Rhoden.
[58:10] » Thank you, Chairman.
[58:13] Um I think I I think the thing that
[58:15] stands out for all of us that I brought
[58:17] up even at DRC was the the parking. I
[58:20] think you um attempting quite well
[58:24] eliminating some of those concerns. The
[58:26] only thing I would say the difference
[58:28] possibly is that at some of the other
[58:30] sites there's other parking nearby that
[58:33] it's is accessible. I think this is
[58:36] pretty isolated so that if you did have
[58:40] a lot of visitors during holidays or
[58:42] whatever that it might
[58:44] might be an issue where it is in other
[58:46] places just to keep in mind. Um and it
[58:50] it looks like on Nibck Road there's only
[58:52] a right turn in and a right turn out. Is
[58:55] that correct?
[58:56] » Correct. There is currently a turn
[58:58] pocket and and a right only right turns
[59:00] in the uh pork chop median that's shown.
[59:03] There you go. Yes. Only right turns will
[59:05] be allowed uh when you're leaving the
[59:06] site.
[59:07] » Is there going to be a guard in the
[59:10] center lane that prevents people from
[59:12] turning from that center lane?
[59:16] » The the lane going west.
[59:19] » Sure. The no the So there is a road and
[59:22] unfortunately the images we see here
[59:23] don't show it. uh quarter horse lane is
[59:25] just immediately to the north and we did
[59:27] explore I believe it's called a worm
[59:29] median where it would really funnel the
[59:31] traffic and and and restrict those those
[59:34] turns but it would impact the existing
[59:36] neighborhood to the north and so that
[59:37] that solution was um was taken off the
[59:40] table and the um the pork chop which
[59:43] will only impact this project and not
[59:45] the rest of the city um was was selected
[59:47] as the solution. So, I see what what
[59:50] happens out on Highway 46 with when we
[59:54] partitioned it to where you're not
[59:55] supposed to make a left turn on on
[59:57] airport on the 46. I can't tell you how
[1:00:00] many trucks have been turning in front
[1:00:01] of me going east on 46. So, that that
[1:00:05] was one of my concerns that people
[1:00:07] aren't going to want to go down to the
[1:00:08] light, do a U-turn in both directions.
[1:00:11] » Commissioner Rhoden, I can speak a
[1:00:13] little bit to the pork chop as well. Um
[1:00:15] during design, a traditional pork chop
[1:00:17] was proposed uh by the applicant.
[1:00:19] However, the applicant then worked with
[1:00:21] the city's traffic consultants to have a
[1:00:23] more defined pork chop that really
[1:00:26] funnels traffic to the east because that
[1:00:28] was our traffic consultants concern as
[1:00:30] well. And
[1:00:30] » Is there a shaking finger there for
[1:00:32] people who
[1:00:35] » Uh yeah, it was identified during the
[1:00:37] planning entitlements and then will be
[1:00:39] further pursued in construction
[1:00:40] documents to make sure that the um
[1:00:42] appropriate pork chop geometry is
[1:00:44] installed there.
[1:00:45] » Thank you. I like the project. As you
[1:00:48] know, we have limited rentals in this in
[1:00:51] this town. Very limited limited senior
[1:00:54] and lowincome rentals. Um, I like the
[1:00:58] area of where it's being proposed as
[1:01:00] well.
[1:01:01] That's it.
[1:01:04] » Thank you, Commissioner.
[1:01:06] Commissioner
[1:01:08] Commissioner Marlo.
[1:01:10] » Good.
[1:01:10] » All right. Uh, just a couple questions.
[1:01:13] So, [clears throat] the you guys, the
[1:01:16] city is requesting in addition uh to the
[1:01:19] approval
[1:01:21] more requirements around an
[1:01:23] archaeologist.
[1:01:25] Um what can you and you probably said it
[1:01:27] but can you run me through the thought
[1:01:28] process there because I think the
[1:01:31] purpose of concessions and reducing
[1:01:33] parking and all these things are to keep
[1:01:34] construction costs down which allows the
[1:01:36] affordable housing and I've been on
[1:01:38] projects with a full-time arch
[1:01:40] archaeologist on site and it's extremely
[1:01:42] expensive and I've in my career never
[1:01:45] actually found anything that not to say
[1:01:47] that it wouldn't be justified to a
[1:01:49] degree. So could you walk me through
[1:01:50] that because
[1:01:51] » Yeah, as I stated with the previous
[1:01:53] iteration, we did prepare a mitigated
[1:01:55] negative declaration and there was an
[1:01:56] archa a report prepared for the site.
[1:01:59] The archaeologists who went out did not
[1:02:01] find any artifacts or evidence uh you
[1:02:03] know of of cultural resources being
[1:02:05] located on the site. Um but we did
[1:02:07] receive a comment from the Native
[1:02:09] American community and that was a
[1:02:10] request. Um and so uh we've worked with
[1:02:13] the applicant and they are comfortable
[1:02:14] with the with the condition and are
[1:02:16] ready to accept it. Um and so it would
[1:02:19] require you know monitoring when they
[1:02:20] first break the ground open and are
[1:02:22] doing that grading. Um but it is in re
[1:02:24] in response to a previous comment that
[1:02:26] re received from the tribes.
[1:02:28] » Okay. I understand. And and the
[1:02:31] applicant you guys are okay. All right.
[1:02:33] I know that can get pretty expensive. So
[1:02:36] um the only other thing is um the trash
[1:02:39] enclosure. Don't love where it's at. I'm
[1:02:42] not sure if there's a lot of other
[1:02:44] options. seems like it's just kind of
[1:02:45] hanging out there. But, uh, not really a
[1:02:47] question, more of a comment. But my only
[1:02:49] other thing would be like maybe you
[1:02:51] could tuck that into the hillside or
[1:02:53] something a little more creative. But
[1:02:54] aside from that, um, oh, just just one
[1:02:57] more thing with with these um
[1:02:59] concessions, just what I was doing quick
[1:03:01] quick research, unless it provoke from
[1:03:03] my understanding propos uh is a major
[1:03:06] safety or health issue, we really that's
[1:03:09] pretty much entitled, right? Like they
[1:03:11] because of what they're providing.
[1:03:13] » That's correct. the city would be
[1:03:14] exposed to legal challenges if if we did
[1:03:17] not uh you know accept the the density
[1:03:19] bonus requested and those concessions.
[1:03:21] » Where's that line at? Because you know
[1:03:23] we're less parking. I I get the point.
[1:03:27] Probably never going to be full. Is
[1:03:29] there like a cost analysis done where
[1:03:32] like well actually we could get two more
[1:03:34] or four more spots for little to no
[1:03:36] money? I'm just curious like where the
[1:03:38] line is on that, right? because
[1:03:40] » For for for $5,000 they could get all
[1:03:43] the spots. I'm not saying that's true.
[1:03:44] Like where is that line drawn? And
[1:03:46] » There is some language in state law that
[1:03:48] addresses that. Um it would be the onus
[1:03:50] of the city to provide that
[1:03:52] documentation. It's not the
[1:03:53] responsibility of the applicant and so
[1:03:55] it would be a financial burden on the
[1:03:57] city to do that. We do have the city
[1:03:58] attorney on the line and if she wants to
[1:04:01] to chime in um I'm sure she has knows
[1:04:04] the law better than I. Yeah, I was just
[1:04:05] I was just curious because so it's it's
[1:04:08] on us to say, well, actually it wouldn't
[1:04:10] cost you that much more money to do it
[1:04:11] is what you're saying. Okay. All right.
[1:04:14] Well,
[1:04:16] that's all I had. Thank you.
[1:04:19] » Thank you, Commissioner. Looking over to
[1:04:21] my right, Commissioner Kogler. Mr.
[1:04:24] » Chair, thank you. Um, my site related
[1:04:26] questions have already been asked and
[1:04:28] answered thanks to my peers and Katie's
[1:04:30] responses. I'm just curious for the
[1:04:32] applicant. You said you have a marketing
[1:04:34] study that's going to be done. Since the
[1:04:36] housing redevelopment authority is a
[1:04:37] component of this project, will that be
[1:04:38] public and available to us to look at
[1:04:41] when it's completed?
[1:04:42] » Okay. I think that would be really
[1:04:44] informative for this group and others
[1:04:45] within the city to have updated data.
[1:04:48] Thank you.
[1:04:50] » Thank you, sir. Commissioner Neil,
[1:04:53] » I was on DRC when this came forward and
[1:04:55] I quizzed the group extensively, so I
[1:04:58] think I had most of my questions
[1:05:00] answered.
[1:05:00] » Great.
[1:05:02] Good. Okay.
[1:05:04] Okay. Most of my questions Well,
[1:05:06] actually, you know what? I'll I'll ask
[1:05:08] just for clarification purposes. Um, you
[1:05:11] mentioned improvements.
[1:05:13] Sidewalks.
[1:05:15] I think it had Does it have sidewalks
[1:05:17] now?
[1:05:18] » Sidewalks are existing. I think there's
[1:05:20] a few spots I think some accessibility
[1:05:22] improvements, but the you're correct.
[1:05:24] The there is curb gutter and sidewalk
[1:05:26] surrounding uh both the north and west
[1:05:28] side of the lot. So when it comes to
[1:05:30] what because there's a lot of water that
[1:05:31] runs down Nibck during that you know
[1:05:34] during our storms is there going to be
[1:05:36] added drainage?
[1:05:37] » I'm going to defer to the city engineer.
[1:05:41] » There's a big piece.
[1:05:43] » Yeah.
[1:05:43] » Um there are drainage um proposed for
[1:05:47] the project um at the the left or excuse
[1:05:52] me the right turn in and right turn out.
[1:05:56] Edith, could you identify yourself,
[1:05:58] please?
[1:05:58] » Edith, could you identify yourself?
[1:06:00] Thank you.
[1:06:02] » This is Edith Lim with North Coast
[1:06:04] Engineering.
[1:06:06] » Um,
[1:06:08] and there is currently um a a cross
[1:06:12] gutter that goes across the existing
[1:06:15] driveway turnin.
[1:06:18] So, with the the little right hand turn
[1:06:21] in, right hand turn out, um there will
[1:06:25] be
[1:06:26] um an undersidewalk drain specific for
[1:06:29] this project to keep that water flowing.
[1:06:33] » Okay, thank you for that.
[1:06:34] » And and I would add to that is that um
[1:06:37] storm water would continue to flow in
[1:06:39] current conditions.
[1:06:41] » Okay.
[1:06:41] » As it does today.
[1:06:42] » As it does today. Okay.
[1:06:44] » Thank you very much. Um question Katie.
[1:06:48] So Highlands and the big parking lot is
[1:06:50] behind it to the uh to the south,
[1:06:54] correct? Is there going to be pathways
[1:06:56] and everything to that side of it or
[1:06:58] does does the restricted area, the creek
[1:07:01] prevent anything from going that way?
[1:07:04] » Yeah, any pathway would require grading
[1:07:06] within that uh within the the creek um
[1:07:09] or the the seasonal drainage. Um uh so
[1:07:12] if folks wanted to utilize, you know,
[1:07:14] the Highlands, if they wanted to to make
[1:07:15] the hike, um they would be going down
[1:07:17] the sidewalk and down that unnamed road
[1:07:19] that's to the west of the site.
[1:07:21] » Okay. And I'm sorry, I'm going to ask
[1:07:23] one more question. I I keep looking at
[1:07:25] my notes. Um there was a mention about
[1:07:27] kids. So in my understanding, it's so
[1:07:30] it's a 55 and older,
[1:07:33] not to say 55 year olds don't have
[1:07:35] children.
[1:07:37] Is it is it children restricted or
[1:07:40] children are acceptable
[1:07:43] on site living?
[1:07:46] » It's the size of the unit.
[1:07:48] » You can you somebody come up to the mic
[1:07:50] and answer that for those that are
[1:07:52] hearing listening.
[1:07:56] » It's just public comment.
[1:07:58] » So this So there's a majority of onebs,
[1:08:02] right? 25 onebedrooms and um the rest
[1:08:05] are two bedrooms. So the units
[1:08:08] themselves don't really lend themselves
[1:08:10] to having anyone really else in there.
[1:08:12] And typically the two bedrooms are
[1:08:14] occupied with couples or one and a
[1:08:17] caregiver. Um which it's typically
[1:08:20] couples if anything. Um at least that's
[1:08:22] our population that we're seeing at
[1:08:23] Riverwalk. So like I said in the lease
[1:08:25] it's it's pretty clear. Um, we're um
[1:08:29] with fair housing laws, there are
[1:08:31] exceptions that need to be made. Um, I
[1:08:33] can't like tell you exactly what the
[1:08:35] fair housing laws are. I don't have
[1:08:36] those memorized, but um, we really
[1:08:39] haven't come up with that instance where
[1:08:40] there's young children or even children
[1:08:43] living with them. It's usually like
[1:08:44] visiting if anything.
[1:08:46] » Okay.
[1:08:47] » It's it's hard to guarantee not, right?
[1:08:49] I can't put that stamp of guarantee on
[1:08:51] it, but it's not what what we've seen.
[1:08:53] It's not what's at chat daughter. It's
[1:08:54] not at Riverwalk Terrace. Well, and just
[1:08:56] to confirm, there's no fencing between
[1:08:58] Nibck Road and the property itself.
[1:09:00] Right. Correct. So, the concern I was
[1:09:02] thinking is if there's children
[1:09:05] and they start playing out in the front
[1:09:08] and
[1:09:10] happen to wander on towards Nipick, that
[1:09:12] could also be very dangerous.
[1:09:13] » And there's a um I don't know if we
[1:09:14] could put the site plan up real quick.
[1:09:16] Um the the building is set pretty far
[1:09:20] off as far as we could get it um from
[1:09:23] Niblick. And so it's there's a pretty
[1:09:25] large area there. I don't know the exact
[1:09:27] dimensions, but you know, the parking
[1:09:28] lot is there and and uh it's not like
[1:09:31] the building's right on top of Niblick.
[1:09:32] I'm not making any, you know, I'm not
[1:09:34] saying people can't walk, but that is
[1:09:36] that was the point.
[1:09:38] » Okay.
[1:09:38] » Yeah.
[1:09:38] » All right. I appreciate that.
[1:09:39] » Yeah. No problem.
[1:09:40] » Thank you very much.
[1:09:41] » Of course,
[1:09:43] » Sir. Uh on the mic, please, if you're
[1:09:45] going to make a comment.
[1:09:47] » I don't think are you are you speaking
[1:09:49] on behalf of the applicant or you public
[1:09:52] comment?
[1:09:53] We're almost to public comment. Just
[1:09:55] give me two seconds.
[1:09:58] Sorry, I thought he was with you guys.
[1:10:00] All right, no other questions. Then
[1:10:03] we'll go ahead and and then now go
[1:10:05] ahead. You don't have to sit. We're
[1:10:06] going to move this to public comment.
[1:10:07] We'll start with you, sir, if you'd like
[1:10:09] to come on up.
[1:10:17] » Housing authorities.
[1:10:18] » Go ahead and state your name, please.
[1:10:19] » David Anderson. Okay. And um the rules
[1:10:23] are that uh for seniors, you can have a
[1:10:25] guest for up to 10 days or nights over
[1:10:28] the course of the year. You get 10 in a
[1:10:30] row, but once you can't get past the 10,
[1:10:32] you can't have any more. You can't have
[1:10:34] overnight guests continuously beyond the
[1:10:36] 10 days. And that typically is counted.
[1:10:38] I tell you who tells on their their
[1:10:40] neighbors tell on them. So that's how
[1:10:42] that works.
[1:10:43] » Okay?
[1:10:43] » But also, our leases are all
[1:10:45] month-to-month. So there's no
[1:10:48] protections for long-term leases here.
[1:10:50] And when a ten is in violation, it's not
[1:10:53] difficult to document it and then move
[1:10:56] them on if necessary.
[1:10:59] » We we we strive to keep peace in the
[1:11:01] valley. Uh it gets difficult sometimes,
[1:11:04] especially with older folks who are kind
[1:11:05] of in their way and uh um little things
[1:11:09] will set them off. Noise or vibration or
[1:11:11] you know your dog barked and didn't like
[1:11:13] it. So things like that come up and it's
[1:11:15] uh we just try to keep that all under
[1:11:17] under control.
[1:11:18] » Okay.
[1:11:20] That's it. Thank you, sir.
[1:11:23] Any other public comments?
[1:11:25] Seeing none in the audience, Marcy, we
[1:11:27] have one caller.
[1:11:37] » Caller, can you state your name?
[1:11:40] » Hi. Uh, my name is Joseph Collins.
[1:11:45] » Go ahead.
[1:11:47] U I have u been in and out of Pastor
[1:11:52] Robels
[1:11:54] uh since 1971
[1:11:58] and we've owned the Alder Creek
[1:12:00] apartments for I don't know 25 years or
[1:12:05] around that and in recent times we've
[1:12:08] seen a lot of development in town uh
[1:12:11] some affordable
[1:12:13] uh some market Um, I heard the comment
[1:12:17] earlier that uh uh that you just needed
[1:12:23] a lot more housing in Pasarobos. Uh,
[1:12:26] well, that may not necessarily be true.
[1:12:29] If you do a study, you'll find out that
[1:12:32] uh, Arrive, one of our newer
[1:12:35] communities, has 15 vacancies. Blue Oak,
[1:12:39] uh, also a fairly new, has 10 vacancies.
[1:12:42] We at Alder Creek have 10 vacancies,
[1:12:44] beautiful rehabilitated apartments, no
[1:12:48] takers. We can't fill them. Uh there's
[1:12:50] not enough people in the community to
[1:12:52] occupy
[1:12:54] the market apartments and we're happy to
[1:12:58] show our community and for that matter
[1:13:00] the other communities. But anyway,
[1:13:02] having said that, we're dealing with
[1:13:04] this the affordable housing. Now, uh I
[1:13:08] wanted to address a couple of issues
[1:13:09] there. uh the the architecture
[1:13:14] it looks to to me you come to pass robos
[1:13:17] because you've got open space you've got
[1:13:19] hills it's beautiful it's amazing it's
[1:13:22] wonderful and uh this architecture is a
[1:13:27] glob of dwellings
[1:13:29] set on this parcel
[1:13:33] and then in order to facilitate that
[1:13:36] you've got to cut the bluff and then
[1:13:38] you've got to
[1:13:40] uh support the the bluff. Well, the
[1:13:43] bluffs
[1:13:44] are one of the most amazing things about
[1:13:48] the community. But uh you know that
[1:13:53] be it as it may, I want to talk quickly
[1:13:56] about the parking.
[1:13:58] I'm 76 years old. I think I'm certainly
[1:14:02] uh uh qualify for 55 and older. I still
[1:14:06] drive. my wife still drives. Uh I think
[1:14:12] uh saying that these folks are not going
[1:14:15] to drive is inappropriate because they
[1:14:18] will and there's not enough parking on
[1:14:22] site to accommodate their visitors to
[1:14:26] accommodate them. And uh so these folks
[1:14:30] are going to have to park someplace
[1:14:31] else. They're going to go down and park
[1:14:34] in the church parking lot, the shopping
[1:14:35] center parking lot, and that's going to
[1:14:38] be a problem. They're going to come up
[1:14:39] and park with us when we've got plenty
[1:14:41] of parking. And so I I think that
[1:14:47] the parking
[1:14:49] is a factor. It's a big factor with this
[1:14:52] community.
[1:14:54] Uh that I wanted to also address.
[1:14:56] » Sir, your your time is up. Stay locked.
[1:15:02] » Sir, you
[1:15:04] » Yes.
[1:15:04] » Your time is up.
[1:15:19] » Are we good?
[1:15:22] » One more caller.
[1:15:24] » Caller, can you state your name?
[1:15:27] » Oh. Um, my name is Sheila Kurs
[1:15:30] and um I have a a problem with um the
[1:15:36] parking also. Um I'm have many relatives
[1:15:40] that live out of town and in their
[1:15:43] communities um
[1:15:46] there are um
[1:15:49] apartments or senior living with no
[1:15:52] guest parking. So when these guests come
[1:15:55] or if you have an additional parking,
[1:15:57] you're parking in the street. Niblick is
[1:16:00] sloped.
[1:16:02] And I my question is, is there um does
[1:16:05] Niblick allow street parking in this
[1:16:09] zone?
[1:16:11] Um because guests will park um on the
[1:16:15] street.
[1:16:16] And if you've got another senior coming
[1:16:19] in the community and visiting, they're
[1:16:21] going to want to park in the parking
[1:16:23] lot. So, if there's no guest parking, I
[1:16:26] understand it's it's free for all. It's
[1:16:28] first come, first serve parking, but
[1:16:31] you're you're you're going to want to
[1:16:34] have um over time more additional
[1:16:37] parking. Um, and I also, um,
[1:16:43] you know, agree with the the the
[1:16:45] structure, the look of the building. It
[1:16:47] doesn't look like it belongs in Paso. It
[1:16:51] looks like it belongs
[1:16:53] in Southern California
[1:16:56] um, in a bigger in a bigger town. Um, so
[1:16:59] those are my comments is I I really
[1:17:02] think that there is going to be a
[1:17:03] parking problem here. Um and um the
[1:17:08] building really doesn't fit the
[1:17:11] community.
[1:17:21] » Thank you caller.
[1:17:51] caller.
[1:17:52] » Good evening.
[1:17:52] » Can you hear me?
[1:17:54] » Yes.
[1:17:55] » Go ahead. You have three minutes.
[1:17:58] » Hi, this is Linda George, U 3126 Spring
[1:18:01] Street. I have to echo about the
[1:18:04] parking. It's really interesting
[1:18:06] project. Um the parking I have been in
[1:18:11] the longest parking war
[1:18:14] uh ever in my existence. has been
[1:18:16] ongoing for 60 days. And this is
[1:18:18] something that I approached uh Chief
[1:18:20] Nord about because there are no real
[1:18:23] experts on parking or neighborhood
[1:18:26] disputes, so to speak. And that's one of
[1:18:28] the most common problems um with people
[1:18:32] is parking. So, I didn't get to hear if
[1:18:37] there's street parking on Nibblet, but
[1:18:40] for me, I mean, maybe I don't understand
[1:18:43] why there would be oak trees when there
[1:18:45] could be more parking, but you guys
[1:18:48] limited parking on a mixed use per
[1:18:51] resident. Now, I understand with the ADU
[1:18:54] laws that that came out, not this last
[1:18:57] legislative session, but the one prior,
[1:18:59] that you guys are not requ uh that you
[1:19:01] can't require um I don't know if it's
[1:19:04] ADUs or buildings in general to um
[1:19:07] provide parking. Um, so I don't know how
[1:19:11] you guys work that conflict when you're
[1:19:14] uh designing these uh these buildings,
[1:19:18] but just take it from somebody who's
[1:19:20] having the last 60 days plus of hell and
[1:19:23] trying to go through 8 CD, that kind of
[1:19:26] stuff that those things really matter. I
[1:19:29] know you get density bonuses and bonuses
[1:19:32] here, etc., etc.,
[1:19:34] But we're everyday people and we like
[1:19:37] our little territory that we pay for.
[1:19:39] And I'm always afraid I'm working in in
[1:19:42] nursing homes and things like that back
[1:19:44] in the heyday why you guys would put
[1:19:46] seniors in a three-story building. Um I
[1:19:50] could see rescue efforts women or people
[1:19:52] in wheelchairs disabled because
[1:19:54] generally I'm 58.
[1:19:58] um if I went to go live there, I would
[1:20:01] be upset if my my grandchild can stay
[1:20:04] longer. What if my son was in the
[1:20:05] Marines? That kind of stuff. But just
[1:20:07] remember when it comes to parking, when
[1:20:10] I worked at Agnes Developmental Center,
[1:20:12] we had a res a staff shoot somebody over
[1:20:15] it and died. So, please keep that in
[1:20:18] mind. Thank you very much.
[1:20:32] Okay. All right. I think we're good.
[1:20:34] Good. Thank you, Marcy. Okay. I I think
[1:20:37] of all that I probably one thing,
[1:20:39] Warren, the the parking on Nibcktick,
[1:20:42] there is no parking right directly in
[1:20:44] front of the development on Nibble.
[1:20:46] Correct.
[1:20:47] » Yeah. Let's have the city engineer come
[1:20:49] up and Leslie can answer the questions
[1:20:52] about Nibck best.
[1:20:55] » Sorry, I missed one caller. It looks
[1:20:57] like there's one more that made it in
[1:20:58] right before public comment.
[1:21:08] » Hello.
[1:21:09] » Hi. Go ahead. State your name. You have
[1:21:11] three minutes.
[1:21:13] Hi, this is Trevor Collins and I wanted
[1:21:16] to ask if they've done any studies. If
[1:21:18] you go up to Nickerson,
[1:21:20] I everybody's going to go up and do a
[1:21:22] U-turn up there. Have we done any
[1:21:24] traffic mitig mitigation for that
[1:21:26] location?
[1:21:28] And then also I wanted to mention that
[1:21:30] uh the u um occupancy the state law says
[1:21:36] that you can put two plus one into an
[1:21:39] apartment. So, in the one-bedroom
[1:21:40] apartments, you can put three people. In
[1:21:43] the two-bedroom apartments, you can put
[1:21:44] five,
[1:21:46] and people do. And so, uh, I think that
[1:21:49] parking is going to be a really big
[1:21:51] issue. And then the traffic, there's
[1:21:54] going to be a lot of U-turns up there,
[1:21:56] and we need to address that or somebody
[1:21:58] needs to address that U-turn location
[1:22:01] because it's going to be backed up all
[1:22:04] the way all the way down the street.
[1:22:18] Okay, that is the last uh public color.
[1:22:22] » Is this on?
[1:22:23] » Thank you, Mercy.
[1:22:24] » Is this on? There we go. Um, so to
[1:22:27] address uh the condition on Nibck, um
[1:22:30] there is no existing on street parking
[1:22:32] in Nibcktick right now and none is
[1:22:34] proposed. Uh currently the geometry of
[1:22:37] the street, you've got two through lanes
[1:22:39] that are eastbound, two through lanes
[1:22:41] that are westbound, and then class 2
[1:22:43] bicycles on each side. Uh into the site,
[1:22:46] there is a designated right turn lane as
[1:22:48] well. And again, there is no parking
[1:22:50] within Niblick currently. Um regarding
[1:22:53] the call, uh the caller that addressed
[1:22:56] the concern with the no U-turns, that
[1:22:58] was also evaluated by the city's traffic
[1:23:00] consultant. They identified the same
[1:23:02] concern and there will be a no U-turn
[1:23:04] sign placed at Nickerson.
[1:23:10] » Okay, thank you for that. So, with that,
[1:23:12] we're going to go ahead and close public
[1:23:14] comment, bring it back to the commission
[1:23:16] for last questions, comments, or I would
[1:23:20] entertain a motion.
[1:23:22] Commissioner Connley.
[1:23:24] » Thank you. Um, I'm looking at the
[1:23:26] traffic study and uh I don't know if it
[1:23:28] has to do with the uh allowing for over
[1:23:32] and above what's uh been analyzed, but
[1:23:34] uh it's based on uh less than 30 units.
[1:23:39] I think they have 24 lowincome housing
[1:23:41] units uh as the basis for the traffic
[1:23:44] study. Um
[1:23:48] and um I don't believe that even given
[1:23:52] that there was a major impact on uh
[1:23:55] Nibck Road, but would that need to be
[1:23:58] addressed uh because of the number being
[1:24:01] 30 instead of 24?
[1:24:12] » There you go. Okay. Um I don't believe
[1:24:14] so. uh because of the the trip
[1:24:16] generation was already calculated in
[1:24:18] there and and as you already mentioned
[1:24:20] and observed that um the trip generation
[1:24:22] was well below any any significant
[1:24:25] impact.
[1:24:26] » Yeah, I thought it was pretty ne
[1:24:28] negligible. Um just a comment I I think
[1:24:31] the access off of uh restricted to off
[1:24:35] of NibLick is better than having access
[1:24:38] to the parking lot below. I think that's
[1:24:41] a good point. And I think the elderly uh
[1:24:44] community, the senior living is a good
[1:24:47] use for this site. I mean, this is a
[1:24:50] difficult site to to to use that space
[1:24:54] because it's so limited. So, I really
[1:24:57] like this project as far as the type of
[1:24:59] use and the fact that the access is
[1:25:01] limited to NibLick. So, I would be
[1:25:05] willing to entertain a motion unless
[1:25:07] other have have comments.
[1:25:10] Looks like Commissioner Marlo has
[1:25:12] » No, I'd like to make a motion. There's
[1:25:14] no other comment.
[1:25:14] » I love it.
[1:25:16] » We got a comment by Commissioner
[1:25:18] Christensen.
[1:25:19] » Go ahead.
[1:25:20] » Thank you. I just wanted to make a
[1:25:23] comment in the sense that um my first
[1:25:25] concern was parking and so I hear the
[1:25:28] public's comments. I think that they
[1:25:30] have to also consider is that this is a
[1:25:32] low income. the concessions take a lot
[1:25:35] of that out of the city's hands in a way
[1:25:37] that kind of handcuffs us to a certain
[1:25:40] extent. So staff tries to do the best
[1:25:42] that they can to mitigate whatever is
[1:25:44] possible and I think they've done a
[1:25:46] great job doing that. Uh we do have a
[1:25:48] turn lane there already. So I understand
[1:25:50] the concern from the traffic standpoint.
[1:25:52] I think that that will get cars out of
[1:25:53] traffic's way. Um the ingress egress
[1:25:56] there's really that's probably the best
[1:25:58] solution rather than down from below
[1:26:01] where you're going through a parking lot
[1:26:02] where pedestrians are and you're
[1:26:04] crossing a pedestrian and bike trail
[1:26:07] which was a concern of mine as well from
[1:26:09] the original um approval when I saw
[1:26:12] that. So I hear the public's comments.
[1:26:14] Um I really do. I'm I'm one of those
[1:26:17] commissioners that that takes that as a
[1:26:19] a very large concern when I'm looking at
[1:26:21] these projects. But at the same time, I
[1:26:23] am familiar with the senior housing
[1:26:26] developments in town. Uh I have friends
[1:26:29] and family that live in some of those
[1:26:30] and I can tell you that um um I I don't
[1:26:34] think that parking's really been an
[1:26:36] issue for them. I should know my mom
[1:26:37] would call me first thing if there was
[1:26:39] an issue. So just want to be clear on
[1:26:41] that. Um so I like the project and I
[1:26:44] just wanted to uh put my two cents in on
[1:26:46] the parking. So thank you,
[1:26:48] » Commissioner Christensen. Thank you.
[1:26:49] Well said. I'll enter I'll I'll
[1:26:52] entertain a motion if there are no other
[1:26:53] comments or questions.
[1:26:54] » Yeah, I'd like to make a motion. Is it
[1:26:56] possible to put the uh additional
[1:26:59] condition up there for for me? I don't
[1:27:01] have that one memorized.
[1:27:04] Okay. I'd like to uh move to uh approve
[1:27:09] development plan 25-15 for a 30 unit
[1:27:12] multifamily residential development
[1:27:14] including an affordable housing density
[1:27:16] bonus by adopting draft resolution
[1:27:19] PC26xs
[1:27:21] xxx based on findings with amended
[1:27:24] conditions of approval to include and
[1:27:26] the qualified uh principal
[1:27:30] investigator defined by as an
[1:27:32] archaeologist just reference what's on
[1:27:34] the that one. [laughter]
[1:27:35] » I wasn't going to say the whole thing. I
[1:27:37] was just going to do a summary.
[1:27:38] » Oh, don't. I was going to cut them off.
[1:27:39] » Yeah. No, we were getting there.
[1:27:40] » We got a first on the table by
[1:27:42] Commissioner Marlo. Do I hear a second?
[1:27:43] » I'll second it.
[1:27:44] » Seconded by Commissioner Connley.
[1:27:48] » Roll call, please.
[1:27:52] » Commissioner Marlo.
[1:27:53] » I.
[1:27:54] » Commissioner Connley.
[1:27:55] » I.
[1:27:55] » Mr. Rhoden.
[1:27:56] » I.
[1:27:57] » Mr. Kler.
[1:27:58] » I.
[1:27:59] » Commissioner Neil.
[1:28:00] » I.
[1:28:00] » Mr. Christensen.
[1:28:01] » Hi.
[1:28:02] » Chair Person Karubius. I motion passes
[1:28:05] 70.
[1:28:06] » Congratulations.
[1:28:08] » All right, moving on to discussion
[1:28:10] items. Consent calendar for the DRC
[1:28:13] minutes uh for December 15th, 29th,
[1:28:16] January 5th, and the planning commission
[1:28:18] minutes from January 13th. Are there any
[1:28:21] changes, comments? If not, I will I will
[1:28:24] ask for Oh, Commissioner Neil.
[1:28:26] » I move approval.
[1:28:27] » Thank you, sir.
[1:28:28] » Second.
[1:28:28] » We got a second by Commissioner Kogler.
[1:28:30] I believe that was first by Neil,
[1:28:33] seconded by Commissioner Kogler.
[1:28:36] Roll call, please.
[1:28:38] » Commissioner Neil,
[1:28:40] » I.
[1:28:40] » Mr. Kogler,
[1:28:41] » I.
[1:28:42] » Commissioner Christensen,
[1:28:43] » I.
[1:28:44] » Commissioner Connelly,
[1:28:46] » I.
[1:28:46] » Mr. Rhoden,
[1:28:47] » I.
[1:28:48] » Mr. Marlo,
[1:28:48] » I.
[1:28:49] » Chairperson Cob Rubius.
[1:28:50] » Hi.
[1:28:51] » Motion passes 70.
[1:28:52] » Okay. On to other reports. Housing
[1:28:55] Constraints and Opportunities Committee.
[1:28:58] Yes, we're working on an agenda for
[1:29:00] February. Is it February 12th? February
[1:29:04] 12th, 2 p.m. will be our next housing
[1:29:06] constraints committee meeting. Um the
[1:29:08] main focus will be looking at some
[1:29:11] proposed changes to the city's um
[1:29:14] development fees. Those are the cost
[1:29:16] recovery fees that we charge um
[1:29:18] applicants to process permits in the
[1:29:20] city. Those haven't been updated in 20
[1:29:22] years. There's been a consultant working
[1:29:24] on that for the past year or so. So,
[1:29:26] they're going to be presenting um the
[1:29:28] proposed new fees to the housing
[1:29:29] constraints committee. Housing
[1:29:31] constraints committee will make a
[1:29:32] recommendation to the city council. City
[1:29:34] council will have the final say. They'll
[1:29:36] hold a hearing on that in uh March.
[1:29:39] Thank you. Thank you for that, Warren.
[1:29:41] All right. DRC committee uh rotation
[1:29:44] schedule. Any comments, changes?
[1:29:48] None. Seeing none. Okay, we're good on
[1:29:50] that.
[1:29:54] Okay, moving on to any final planning
[1:29:57] commissioner comments. I see
[1:29:59] Commissioner Kogler reaching for the
[1:30:00] mic.
[1:30:01] » Yeah, one quick one, Mr. Chair. Um, when
[1:30:04] the public calls in, they talk somewhere
[1:30:05] from the heavens. I've tried to figure
[1:30:07] out where it's coming from or just
[1:30:08] bounces around in here. I don't know if
[1:30:10] it's possible to get any better
[1:30:12] acoustics, but I truly find it hard
[1:30:14] sometimes. And I noticed all of us were
[1:30:15] straining to hear and comprehend some
[1:30:17] things that were being said. So, I know
[1:30:18] we're temporary, but I don't know if we
[1:30:20] can get some kind of improved acoustics,
[1:30:23] sound system, whatever. Thank you.
[1:30:26] » Thank you, sir. Seeing no others.
[1:30:29] So, I I want to thank Katie, that was a
[1:30:32] lengthy presentation. Want to thank you
[1:30:34] for all of that. Um, you may update us
[1:30:37] on this, Warren, but I was just curious,
[1:30:39] how are the improvements going um at the
[1:30:41] city? Thanks.
[1:30:44] Yeah. So, we're there's basically a
[1:30:45] two-phase process going on at city hall.
[1:30:48] So, phase one is the remodel of the
[1:30:50] second floor, the city hall space. Um,
[1:30:53] that's going very well. Uh, we are we'll
[1:30:55] be moving back in in February. So,
[1:30:57] there'll be a formal um public service
[1:31:00] counter. We have additional conference
[1:31:02] room space. And then the whole kind of
[1:31:05] layout of cubicles and offices has been
[1:31:07] modernized. All the paint and carpets
[1:31:10] been refreshed. So, it's going to be a
[1:31:12] much more efficient work area. It'll
[1:31:14] look better. It'll accommodate more
[1:31:16] staff members, which will be a benefit.
[1:31:18] So, you'll know right now that half of
[1:31:21] our staff is working in the council
[1:31:22] chamber. So, by the end of February,
[1:31:25] they'll be moved back upstairs, which
[1:31:26] will then open up the council chambers,
[1:31:29] which is the next phase of the remodel
[1:31:31] process. So, that will then be a couple
[1:31:34] of months process. I don't think we have
[1:31:36] a, you know, formal timeline on that. So
[1:31:39] I believe we will be here at least till
[1:31:42] summer sometime best case.
[1:31:44] » Okay.
[1:31:45] » Well, you knew where I was going with
[1:31:46] that question. Okay. Through summer
[1:31:48] maybe. All right.
[1:31:51] » Staff comments.
[1:31:53] » Yeah. So we're in the middle of um
[1:31:56] recruitments for planning commission. Um
[1:31:58] we'll council is going to be doing
[1:32:00] interviews in February. So Marcy, you
[1:32:03] want to give us just a quick update on
[1:32:05] the deadlines and how that's going to
[1:32:07] work out?
[1:32:08] Yes. So, we are accepting applications
[1:32:11] until the end of this week. Um,
[1:32:13] everything is done online via our
[1:32:15] website. Uh, the interviews are
[1:32:18] tenatively scheduled for
[1:32:23] I think it's February 11th. The 11th.
[1:32:25] Yes, sorry. February 11th. So, um once
[1:32:28] we have the inner the application
[1:32:30] process closed, we'll have more of an
[1:32:32] idea of timelines for those applicants.
[1:32:35] um and we will reach out to them with
[1:32:38] that information.
[1:32:41] » Very good. And then after um our
[1:32:44] appointments by the council of
[1:32:47] commissioners um those those seats
[1:32:50] become active in March. So we do our
[1:32:53] traditional reorganization dinner. So
[1:32:55] Marcy, you want to tell us about that?
[1:32:57] » So that is scheduled for Sunday, March
[1:33:00] 1st. Um we are
[1:33:03] can I go ahead and say where?
[1:33:05] » Yeah.
[1:33:05] » Oh, so we are scheduled to be at Calos
[1:33:08] in the patina room like we did a few
[1:33:10] years back. Um so we are finalizing all
[1:33:12] of the agreements and things with that.
[1:33:14] So more information to come to you guys
[1:33:17] uh with timing and you know
[1:33:19] possibilities to bring a plus one and
[1:33:21] how that all normally goes. So uh you'll
[1:33:23] hear from me about that.
[1:33:25] » All right. So Sunday, March 1st. Okay.
[1:33:28] Um we also have another special meeting
[1:33:30] coming up. So um we're working on a
[1:33:33] joint session meeting that'll be between
[1:33:35] the city council, the planning
[1:33:37] commission and the airport commission um
[1:33:40] to review basically the um spaceport
[1:33:43] project and discuss kind of next steps
[1:33:46] moving forward. I think there's some
[1:33:48] major decisions to be made on funding
[1:33:50] additional processes and studies. I
[1:33:53] think the pl the city council is very
[1:33:55] interested to hear from both the
[1:33:56] planning commission and the airport
[1:33:58] commission before we kind of take the
[1:34:00] next formal steps in the spaceport
[1:34:02] process. So that's going to be
[1:34:04] Wednesday, March 4th, 6 p.m. here in
[1:34:08] this noisy room. Um so mark your
[1:34:11] calendars. Um try to keep that date and
[1:34:14] time you know open so that you can
[1:34:16] attend as well.
[1:34:20] We expect it to be at six o'clock, which
[1:34:21] is the normal council time.
[1:34:25] » You'll send out a notice though.
[1:34:27] » Yeah, it's going to be a formal meeting,
[1:34:30] but I just wanted you to get that on
[1:34:32] your calendar so you're not surprised at
[1:34:33] the last second. Okay. So, other
[1:34:36] projects, um, your next meeting is
[1:34:39] February 10th and it looks like a pretty
[1:34:43] busy agenda. So, I think there's going
[1:34:45] to be a multifamily
[1:34:48] um duplex uh subdivision project that
[1:34:51] we're working on on Crestston Road. We
[1:34:54] need to do some updates to our cannabis
[1:34:57] uh delivery ordinance. So, that will be
[1:35:00] before you. You'll be making a
[1:35:01] recommendation to council on that. We
[1:35:03] also need to update our temporary signs
[1:35:06] in preparation for the next election
[1:35:08] cycle. So, that's another ordinance
[1:35:10] you'll be making a recommendation to
[1:35:11] council on. Um there's a small um
[1:35:14] amendment to the ravine water park that
[1:35:17] we expect to be on that agenda as well.
[1:35:21] And then let's see next meeting February
[1:35:24] 24th uh the Pasarobus Youth Arts Center
[1:35:28] expansion is pencled in for a hearing as
[1:35:31] well as an expansion a fairly major
[1:35:33] expansion to the Aligretto Hotel on Bua
[1:35:36] Vista. Um so we're working on that. So I
[1:35:39] think February looks like it's going to
[1:35:40] be fairly busy. We talked about the
[1:35:42] reorganization dinner. We're still
[1:35:44] trying to get a hearing date kind of
[1:35:47] schedule pulled together on the landing
[1:35:49] project. We're getting really close, you
[1:35:51] know, on final conditions and
[1:35:53] development agreement points. Um, but we
[1:35:55] don't have a formal date, but start, you
[1:35:58] know, start going through that EIR so
[1:36:00] you don't cut yourself too short on
[1:36:02] time. Um, so I think those are your
[1:36:04] major things and be happy to answer any
[1:36:08] questions. That concludes staff's
[1:36:09] report.
[1:36:10] » Thank you, sir.
[1:36:11] Okay. If there are no other comments,
[1:36:14] questions, then I'll take a motion to
[1:36:15] adjurnn. So move.
[1:36:17] » So moved. All in favor?
[1:36:19] » I.
[1:36:19] » We are adjourned.