Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good evening. I'd like to bring the meeting to order, please. Welcome to the meeting of the Goleta City Planning Commission for today. And would you please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Could we get a roll call of the Planning Commission, please? Yes, thank you, Chair. Commissioner Fullerton?

Here.

Commissioner Maynard?

Here.

Commissioner Penniman? Here. Vice Chair Sorokin?

Here.

And Chair Miller?

Here.

Now is the time for the public forum. At this time, the public shall have the opportunity to comment on any non-agenda item relevant to the jurisdiction of the city. Do we have any speakers for public forum?

Yes. For those of you on the Zoom monitor who wish to speak to a non-agenda item, please use the raised hand icon, and I will call on you. I'm seeing none for public forum, Chair.

OK. Thank you. Planning Manager Lisa Proce, do we have any amendments or adjustments to the agenda?

We do not.

Thank you. We'll move into the administrative agenda, which is item A1. Would you please read it into the record?

Yes, thank you, Chair. That's item A1, review and approval of the Planning Commission meeting minutes of June 22, 2026.

OK. Do we have any discussion from planning commissioners? Do we have any public forum speakers on this item?

Yes, thank you, Chair. For those of you who wish to speak to the administrative agenda, please use the raised hand icon and I will call on you. I'm seeing none, Chair.

Thank you. Can I get a motion to approve the minutes, please, of June 22nd? I move the motion to approve the minutes.

Commissioner, is your microphone on? Thank you.

There we go. I thought it was. I make a motion to approve the Planning Commission meeting minutes for June 22, 2026.

Do we have a second? I can second. Okay. Can we get a roll call vote, please?

Yes. Thank you, Chair. Commissioners, if you would please lock in your votes. Commissioner Fullerton?

I abstain.

Commissioner Maynard? I abstain.

I approve.

Commissioner Penniman? Abstain. Commissioner Sorotkin?

I approve.

And Chair Miller?

Yes, I approve.

Okay, now we are going to go to the public hearing for this evening. And could you please read the item into the record, please?

Yes, thank you, Chair. That's item B1, Fairview Gardens Conditional Use Permit Project, 598 North Fairview Avenue, APN 069-090-052, case numbers 25-0001-CUP, 25-0003-DRB.

Thank you. And first thing I'm going to ask is for ex parte disclosures. If we can just start maybe with you, Commissioner Fullerton. I have no ex parte.

Commissioner Maynard. I do have an ex parte communication. I spoke with the president of the Fairview Gardens Board on Friday, Jeff Green. I did not learn anything that was not a part of the public record or shared in the applicant letter that was just made public today. I also did do a site visit. I drove around the site and particularly tried to look at some of the areas that had come up in public comment.

Thank you. Commissioner Penniman. I've had none. And Commissioner Sirotkin? I have none. And I will report that I did do a site visit last week, and I met Ms. Stratton, who identified herself as the administrative or business manager. She showed me around, but I did not learn anything that's already in the public record. Thank you. Can we move right into the staff presentation, please?

Thank you, Chair. Good evening, Chair and Commissioners. I'll give some brief staff remarks here, but it should all look pretty familiar from your staff report packet. So again, we are talking about 598 North Fairview, which is the location of Fairview Gardens. It's a continuously operated farm for approximately 125 years. Total acreage is just over 12 acres. It's zoned AG 5 under the general plan and the zoning ordinance. The property is also governed by a private conservation easement held by the Land Trust or Santa Barbara since 1996. And the neighborhood is surrounded on three sides by single-family residential development. And then just real quickly, this is how it looks in our general plan and zoning maps. You see the green Ag zone there in the middle, and the yellow is the single family zoning designation. Real quickly on the core objectives of the project, I'll let the applicant kind of go into this a little bit more detail. But in general, the farm hopes to preserve the agricultural viability of the project and support local food systems. Also, they strive for environmental education through kids programs and community events, fostering stewardship of natural resources. And then also the community integration. They'd like to consolidate all of their uses into a single conditional use permit, which has been proposed and is in front of you this evening. Real quick on the planned structural upgrades in conjunction with the CUP. They are proposing to adaptively reuse the existing farmhouse and restore and conserve the existing building. The uses within would be proposed to be a cafe, commercial kitchen space, or education kitchen. some workspace and one residential unit then there's proposed a multi-functional barn which is new construction of about 6,500 square feet for processing of agricultural products and some community space in there as well Then also proposed is a retail farm stand in generally the same location as the current farm stand. The new farm stand would be 2,500 square feet and still fronting off of Fairview Avenue. Also proposed are farm worker housing in the northeast corner of the site. These would be deed restricted for farm workers and their families of the farm. And then various ancillary structures, including an education pavilion and a restroom. Diving into the farmhouse restoration a little bit further, structural improvements include new foundation and also replacement of the exterior wood siding using existing boards as much as possible. They strive to repair the original siding and trim, replacement of the covered double hung windows to match the original dimensions. Then improve accessibility by having a level front porch and door. And then, as mentioned, the multi-use programs within the cafe, teaching kitchen, offices, and studio apartment. The multifunctional barn and farm stand. The barn will include space for produce packaging, washing, cold storage, and farm logistics. It includes 1,000 square feet of indoor community space as well. The applicant proposed a design refinement based on comments that they had received at DRB on June 9. And so they're proposing a reduced height of four feet from the originally proposed barn to soften the massing from Fairview Avenue, which was a request from the design review board. The new farm stand would be 2,500 square feet market space, bringing fresh products directly to customers. And then the new buildings use a rustic architecture with corrugated metal siding, smooth plaster, and standing seam steel roof. The farm worker housing would be comprised of eight two-bedroom deed-restricted affordable units ranging in size from 855 to 890 square feet. The placement of this is in the northeastern corner of the site, maintaining approximately a 40-foot-plus buffer from residential neighbors. Access would be off of the east end of Stoke Canyon, and would be controlled with a gate following the fire-required turnaround. And then also in response to some comments they received at Design Review Board on June 9, they are proposing to shift the units five feet south. And they also are noting that no short-term rentals would be permitted in these units. In terms of parking and circulation, there are 46 spaces available on site comprising of the spaces near the farm stand and around the proposed barn. Then also proposed is a shared easement with the nearby Christian Science Church to the south and west. This would involve an easement across city property, the library property, which would be subject to a separate approval by city council. It's important to note, though, that the project is designed to work independently of the access easement with the turnaround that's at the south end of the project. There's also bus turnaround near the barn that would safely unload educational groups from schools. In terms of farm operations and animal keeping, they anticipate that the farm would support between 24 and 34 permanent staff, depending on the season and crop intensity. The production space would be managed under organic principles, balancing shard, root vegetables, and orchards, keeping up to 100 chickens as allowed in the zoning ordinance. However, it's conditioned to have no roosters. then up to 26 goats and or sheep and those are these are animal keeping his condition you can see condition number 53 for more details on how animal keeping is conditioned The enclosure siding for the animals would be placed adjacent to the library, safely set back from property lines. And then the composting would be located near the barn toward the center of the property. The farm is proposing essentially three different types of community programs and events. That would be children and adult educational programs, fundraising and dining programs, and then seasonal festivals. To the extent that the events can't be handled by the on-site parking, there is a network of adjacent parking lots that are under separate agreements with the farm to allow patrons to park off-site. There are a number of management tools that the farm intends to use for those types of events including um designating with signs walking routes via the berkeley crosswalk at the stoplight there and then for the larger events having a chp officer direct traffic for those larger events In terms of sound attenuation, the noise would be centered in the property, roughly 200 to 300 feet from the surrounding residential neighborhood. The project will be conditioned such that the Noise that leaves the property doesn't exceed the 60 DBA requirement in our general plan and zoning ordinance for the residential uses that are nearby. And then also, no audio sources would be permitted within the 20-foot setback around the property as well. The attenuation measures would include obviously the siting, but also speakers centered and facing toward Fairview, and then using hay bales to deflect the sound away from the north, east, and south. So in terms of environmental review, we found that the project can be exempt under CEQA guidelines section 15132, which is an infill exemption. Criteria for this type of exemption, project must be consistent with applicable general plan designations and policies. Consistent with zoning regulations must occur within the city limits on a site no more than five acres. The site has no habitat value and will not result in significant effects related to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. And then the site be adequately served by utilities and public services. It's also staff wanted to note that none of the exceptions to the categorical exemptions would apply to this project. Staff wanted to point out before the Planning Commission deliberates on the project after public speaking certain questions that we wanted you to consider. So these would include what level of detail would the planning commission want to see in terms of the landscaping design and the lighting design? Or is the planning commission comfortable with deferring that level of detail to the design review board at final review? Is the siting for the farm worker housing complex appropriate? Are the number, size, and timing of the proposed events and programs appropriate for the site? And then should further detail on the revised project description that was submitted in a slide deck form to staff, should that be required to be a formal submittal prior to planning commission making its findings? So if the Planning Commission can determine that the findings can be met, this is what what a recommendation would look like for approval of the project. I would note that the staff report also gives the Planning Commission a number of options for this evening, including continuance, which would allow further analysis of information to be done before a decision is made. Of course, there's also the option of returning for denial findings if that's the course that the PC would like. But this is what the recommendation would be if the PC is willing to approve the project at this point. So that concludes staff's remarks. I can be here for any questions. Thanks.

Before we go to public comment, I'd like to point out that there is an handout from the applicant out at the front desk. It has Meraki Land Use Consulting on it. And it's from the applicant. And folks may want to take a look at this. And it's right out there along with the speaker slips and the agenda. OK. So now we will go to the applicant presentation. I'd like to read into the record that you have a total of 15 minutes to give a presentation and rebut or clarify anything after public comment. Please reserve time for the latter if you intend to respond to public comment. The Planning Commission may have questions for you, but your time answering our questions does not count towards your 15 minutes. So you may go ahead.

Can we get our presentation up, please? Thank you. My name is Heidi Jones with Meraki Land Use Consulting. Wait for our slide deck, please. Thank you. Next slide. Our project team is happy to be here tonight to go over our proposal with you. The executive director is online and would like to make a few opening comments. Michael Abelman.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

Thank you so much. Yeah, apologies for not appearing in person. I've been away for the last couple of months getting treatment for cancer, so I'm sorry not to be there. In 1981, when I started working at Fairview Gardens, the land was surrounded by farms, most of which disappeared within a few years, making the little farm on Fairview Avenue an agricultural island in a sea of development. New neighbors moved in. Some complained about our roosters and compost, others the signs advertising our produce. Those public disputes were difficult, but our biggest challenge was protecting the land itself that was zoned for 52 condominiums. We formed a nonprofit, raised the money to buy the land, and placed it under one of the first active agricultural conservation easements in the country, one that not only protects it as a working farm in perpetuity, but requires public education and community activities. Everyone present here has benefited in different ways from that effort. Those who lived adjacent to the farm had a permanently protected view into a beautiful working farm instead of a neighbor's condominium wall. And the broader community could rest knowing the farm would be here forever. This community did not step up back then with their time and their resources so that the place could languish as dormant open space. Their support was for us to continue providing unique farm-based programs for their children and excellent food for their tables. Now, this history is important. Our CUP application does not represent some new proposed use. It merely codifies what has been happening on this land for almost 50 years. And my responsibility in returning to the farm was not just to rebuild what was, but to ensure that this little farm would remain culturally relevant, ecologically sound, socially just, and financially viable, and that it addressed some urgent issues such as climate and water. We spent the last several years working on a plan to do just that. The dry farming model, the new facilities, the children's gardens, the adults' teaching gardens, all of it, every single detail carefully conceived of and designed solely and entirely for community benefit. The farm is 12 and 1 half acres, and most programs take place in the center of the property with significant distances from property borders. The program activity we are proposing is not unique for Goleta. Places like Stowe House host events with high participant numbers on a land base that is a fraction of the size of this farm, coexisting with neighbors that live far closer to where those events take place. But I don't want to diminish the concerns expressed to us by our neighbors. Those concerns are real. And as Heidi will describe, we've made substantive changes to our plan to address those concerns. Every element of our application, staff housing, workshops and programs, the restoration of one of the last historic farmhouses in the Goleta Valley, the retail store, the multipurpose barn, are in alignment with existing city and state policies and regulatory initiatives that were created to support local agriculture. I am asking this commission to look carefully at the greater good generated by this farm. a longtime iconic Goleta institution. Please remember all the community service this place has provided over the last five decades. And consider Fairview Gardens not just as a piece of Goleta's past, but in its role in feeding and educating generations to come. When I first came to this valley over 50 years ago, I was part of a broader agrarian community that was prospering, supported by a Mediterranean climate and 30 feet of rich topsoil, now mostly paved over and replaced by a new city that ironically still promotes itself as the good land. Remarkably, while communities across this country are celebrating their local farms and doing everything they can to make sure that they can thrive, I am here at 71 years old yet again defending one of the last working remnants of Goleta's agricultural history and pleading for its right to rebuild and continue in a way that will ensure its future survival. We all need this place more than ever. Please approve this application so we can get back to doing the real work of growing food and community. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Michael. Next slide, please. So first and foremost, this is our community farm. And as Michael mentioned, all of the proposed activities are truly intended to benefit our community. Nothing that we are proposing in terms of events, activities, or spaces is available for commercial or private rent. Rental, it's only for community use. And no weddings are proposed. Next slide. We've hosted several open houses over the last few years, having community members and neighbors out to the farm as recently as last week to talk about our project. We've met one-on-one with these same individuals. And we're here to say, we hear you. We want to be good neighbors. When we look at CUP programming, we have to make them ambitious and big long-term picture goals. We believe the project description warrants greater detail. Grouping the events at the highest capacities at the latest in times overstates what is actually proposed. To that end, I distributed a letter to the Planning Commission today that outlines some meaningful project description changes and clarifications. If the commission's willing to consider them, we'd happy to go into greater detail during the Q&A portion. Next slide. In summary, we've made 14 reductions to the programs and events that are proposed, their frequencies and durations. Overall, this would result in a 55% reduction overall from where we started. We took an earnest look at what we were proposing and what we could lift with and made those reductions. For example, We have earlier end event times. We've scaled back the events. For example, quarterly festivals will now have three instead of four. We've reduced those populations from 800 people to 500. The farm-to-table dinner attendance is cut from 250 to 150. Additionally, the seasonal events are cut from four times a year to two times a year. The lectures are cut from 500 attendees to 250. The weekly activity levels like culinary workshops are cut 80% from 20 times a month to four. The guided tours are cut 66% and the school tours are down a third with half of that attendance. You saw a couple slides back, the farm to table slide, but I just wanted to show you what farm to table events actually look like. The attendance levels are also clarified. For example, the open house event attendance cap is 700 and it's not explicitly explained that that also includes no more than 150 people at any given time. And that's a really important distinction to have. So we need operational diversity. We need to survive in today's economy. Similar to the county's Ag Enterprise Ordinance, it's widely recognized that allowing farms to have these supplemental uses ensures longevity and ensures their viability. We need the latest, biggest little farm to thrive. In addition, we've had some suggested new conditions to offer for your consideration to ensure operational check and balances and to address concerns we have heard. For example, ideas include requiring a dedicated housing farm manager, noting events will not be stacked, providing a public calendar that always publishes what's going on at the farm so anyone can go look at any time to see what's happening. We're happy to go through these in greater detail or go over any CUP topic that you would like. pass it on to Blackbird Architects at this time.

Madam Chair, members of the commission, members attending the hearing, thank you. If we go back to the aerial overview that has the white out, that one, Goleta is a diverse, healthy mix of community, commercial, and residential uses. And the white outlines are non-residential uses in the neighborhood. is Fairview Gardens, an active community heart for that neighborhood. Next. This is the overview of the plan that you've seen. At the design review board, it was unanimously approved with a few comments of things that they asked us to study, but support was clear. Next. There were questions about access. This is a pedestrian access, mostly on dirt, unpaved aisles within the farm. Next. As you saw earlier from staff, they did a great presentation. Next. Composting and animals moved to the center of the site. Next.

Next.

regarding housing, which is located on an agricultural support area easement. That easement is outlined in the blue rectangle. It is set eight feet down from the northerly neighbors. And we studied as well to move these four duplexes five feet further down from 38 feet to 43 feet away from the property line. Also, importantly, there were questions about access. These residential units are accessed with a gate and signage such that only the residents of these four duplexes can come through that gate to use the parking. I think it's important to also state that the access to this housing comes from a residential neighborhood. And so these are permanent residents who, if they had a kid, the kid could walk to Kellogg School, like about 300 yards down the road. Next. Next. We saw these views of these low slung, low set screened duplexes. Next. Next. I'm going quickly just to preserve time for questions and rebuttal with you. Next. The character of the central elements is agricultural. These roll-up doors create an open invitation to the community to come and get fresh food and to experience a small farm. Next. Arriving at the little drop off on the south end of the project, you would be looking across demonstration gardens, children's gardens, and you'd be seeing the historic farmhouse as the identity of arrival. Next. It was studied to pull that drop off spot a little bit north as part of response to DRB. Next. The character and identity of this site does hinge on this old farmhouse, and that is what greets you and invites you onto the site as a visitor or a program participant. Next. Here, I think, is a great slide. You can see that the farmhouse and the barn are in dialogue and support one another with applause in between. Next. That little plaza between the two spaces is set off with a porch for these activities. That little plaza between the two structures is the main public gathering space for the site. Next. Next. We can just flip through. We lowered the height of the project by five feet at the barn, which is on par with the house. Next. This shows the two different studies where the barn is made smaller. Next. The section with the smaller barn up top. Next. We can cover any of this in a question period. Next. Next. Next. The events, the capacity of this space for events is established that it could easily hold the 1,200 people. Next. We saw this good view of it. Next. We are not alone. There are many community supporters for Fairview Gardens and partners. And we're available for questions. I hope you'll support the project. Thank you.

You have a minute and 30 seconds left for rebuttal. And yes, so you may want to.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

OK. We're going to start with Planning Commissioner questions for both the staff and the applicants. So if you could please let me know whether you'd like to ask a question. Commissioner Fullerton.

I have a question for the applicant. It's about just the overall, I guess, one of the questions that staff raised. Why was this submitted without a landscaping plan and a photometric plan?

Sure. So we originally provided a landscape plan for DRB. All of the low landscape pathway lights are internal to the site. There are three poles near the farmhouse. One moment. I'm going to tell you how far they're located from the property line. 67 feet from the property line and 13 feet from the road wide away. We did not see the requirement or condition to have a photometric plan or a landscape plan for the screening until Wednesday night when we saw the conditions. We're happy to prepare one for that northern boundary screening. I think having an active farm, we do not want to have a site-wide landscape plan. The farm is a landscape of itself, and we need the flexibility to move crops around or do different things in different areas of the farm. So that is why we do not have one. We're happy to prepare one.

And a follow-up question on the photo metrics. If you're going to be having events in the evening, I mean, that is going to require lighting. So I think, to me, without being able to see the effects of the lighting, it makes it really hard to Make a decision.

Understood. You will see in our project description, we updated a lot of the time frames. A lot of the activities occur on the weekends in the summer. And in the summer, it is light until 9 o'clock at night. We did change the end times for Sundays and other non-summer, the rest of the year, to be 8 o'clock. In reality, a lot of these are outdoors. It's going to be dark. And so we are not proposing any lighting, any string lighting, any additional lighting. you know, as part of our program. It would all be low lit or we could, you know, have some candles or fake candles, the tables.

Okay. And then, sorry, just a couple more questions. In the presentation that was attached to the staff report, you had mentioned concerts. Can you explain that? what kind of concerts you would want to have and amplified sound.

Sure. So my recollection, and I know the land trust wrote a letter of support, is the original conservation easement used the term concert. We chose to use festival. This is not equivalent to a large concert. In fact, our acoustics report specifically states that is not the intended use to be a loud rock concert. We expect it to be some bluegrass music in a picnic setting. It's not Coachella. You know, this big, loud thing, it is going to be farm appropriate. So how you would describe that? Yeah, I guess low-level, bluegrass-centered, calmer music. It's not a rock concert venue.

And as far as the festivals, is there going to be alcohol on site? You know, that is a good question. It has not come up before. Okay. A few more questions. You didn't show anything about the parking plan.

So. Sure. We have some backup slides, and we have our transportation engineer here as well. So as staff mentioned, we have parking on site. We have parking agreement with the church next door. We also have another parking agreement with the church a little bit further down the street and across the street. We have some transportation demand management plan that outlines how that will occur. So at events that exceed a certain number, for example, 800 people, we would have to notify everyone that gets a ticket, here's where you park. We would have directions. We would manage it so that everyone knows where they're going and where they're parking. You would have people informing them of where to go. And there's measures like that with each level of detail to direct people where to park so that parking would not be provided on the public streets.

But how would they know, if you have like five different parking locations and someone wants to come to the event, how would they know which lot to go to? How would they know which one is full and which one is not full at any time?

Yeah, we would have an attendant out there. We'd have to have very robust communication. This happens a lot of times with a lot of CUPs where you develop plans like this because you have to manage them and we want to manage them. So we would, depending on the size of event, you get a ticket and you say, you are parking here, that lot is full. There would be an attendant telling you to go to the next lot.

Okay, and then just one more question on the parking. If you lose these parking agreements, how would that work? Would it be conditional to then have lower attendance at these events?

I would ask staff how they would want to address that or condition or propose a condition to address that concern.

Okay, so can I ask for staff?

Sure, Chair and Commissioners. Yeah, I think if something that was relied on via an agreement was no longer there, the applicant would have to return to the city with a new plan, essentially, that we would review and potentially approve if there was a good replacement. So either, like you say, either smaller events or

parking in a different location that would be equivalent to what they were losing okay and then just one question for traffic I know the traffic studies don't I believe include weekends but a lot of these events are on the weekends we've seen this with multiple projects lately and especially if we have the case where you could potentially have hundreds of or 1,000 cars trying to come and park in different lots. I mean, that could be potentially affecting these neighborhoods as well. You have cars driving through a neighborhood, finding it full, going to another lot. I mean, just how do we really know the effect of the traffic without having traffic studies for the weekend?

Yeah, Chair and Commissioners, I think I would have the applicant's traffic Engineer respond to that one. I think that would be the best at this point Thank You mr.

I felt hi Scott shell with associated transportation engineers Just to go back. We had this discussion at anthem about the weekend traffic Commissioner Maynard you kind of hit on that pretty pretty well You know, so cities, transportation policies that for consistency analysis with your general plan, we look at the weekday aim and peak hours and then the roadway capacities during weekdays. As Heidi had mentioned, we did do a very robust traffic and parking management plan for the events. I thought she had some backup slides, but I'm just holding one up. But it basically shows where all the signs and the traffic control officers would be and how they would be implemented. I've done something similar to this at the Avila Beach Resort, where they have a main lot. It fills up. They send you to the next lot. And it's all manned with personnel. and sign it. So Mr. Schleich isn't here, but we worked with public work staff to come up with a plan. We did several different iterations to kind of fine tune it. So that's how the weekend traffic would be handled, this management plan. I'm not sure how many events we have now in the weekend scenario. We've cut them back quite a bit.

Mr. Schell, I would have to calculate that number given the very hard work I've been doing all day.

OK, no Heifeld, no Heidi. OK. Was there anything else?

No, thanks.

OK. Also for the applicant, there's one studio unit in the farmhouse. Is that also deed restricted, or is that not restricted?

That unit is not deed restricted.

And what's that intended to be used for?

We want it to remain flexible. It's not a short-term rental. But if you have a visiting lecturer or somebody coming to teach a class about soil science or whatnot, that there is room available. Or we just want it to be unrestricted, but not short-term.

That makes sense. Thank you. One more question was about the barn. It does seem a little large. I didn't understand by looking at the plans that there is a second floor. And what is that? Is there? And did I understand that right? And what's that second story used for?

Sure. Ken Radke will come up and explain.

Thanks.

and chair, Commissioner Penniman. There's a partial mezzanine upstairs, which is really mostly intended to be for storage. And the size of the barn really is to have proper storage for interim storage for crops that have just come out and then they're processing so that they can be trimmed and gotten ready to go out quickly just to make it more efficient and to save more of the produce and make it more effective. Also, they'll be operating and loading using a a forklift and so forth in there. So they need to roam around and move big boxes of produce like we've seen at ag operations. As ag barns go, this is tiny, but it's kind of twice as big as the house in essence.

Yeah, that's probably what makes it look so big. So mostly mezzanine storage.

That's what's up there, yeah.

Great, thank you. That's all I had for applicants.

Got a couple of questions for different audiences. So we'll jump around a little bit. Let me start with staff. With the stormwater planning that was done, to what extent have they looked at some of the potential flooding issues, particularly on the southeast corner where we've run in? There's been some record of challenges in the past.

Thank you, chair and commissioners. I'm going to get our public works folks on the phone here. I believe they're online. Either Mark. I think it's Mark. Okay. Mark can speak to that. Mark's like.

Good evening.

Hopefully my Internet is stable during my response. Yeah, I talked to the design engineer a little bit about that concern, and this is an existing problem of localized flooding. It's not in a FEMA floodplain, so none of the residents, because of this localized flooding, has their house or their structures in peril and are not required to get flood insurance for it. In dealing with this existing condition, we will design it and revise it to current standards.

And that designing and revising hasn't occurred yet?

It will need to meet our engineering standards. It basically becomes the size of the pipe under the driveway to the farm housing.

And then while I've got you, there is a culvert that runs along there. Is that a creek escha or environmentally sensitive habitat area? Or is that kind of a man-made culvert? And can you help me understand what's going on on that east side there?

Chair and commissioners, I think I can handle that particular part of the question. It's not mapped escha. There are no mapped escha on the site or within 300 feet, I believe, of the site.

And on the trees, can you help us remind me how many trees will need to be removed and to what extent have we seen where those would get replanted and size of trees that would be replanted? I think this may go into the issues around having a landscape plan, but I wanted to get your guidance on that.

Right. Yeah. I believe it was two trees. I'll verify that with the applicant here. Two trees that needed removal as part of the project.

Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner and staff. There is one tree being impacted, one coast live oak tree. I believe it's 14 inch that requires removal for the staff housing. We shifted that slightly to avoid additional trees. There is one 36 inch oak down in that southern drop off area that Blackbird explains they studied pushing further north if The Planning Commission likes that redesign. That tree would need to be reassessed and could potentially not require or not need to have replacement plantings. So there are four 36-inch box oak trees proposed along the northern property line that would need to be formally established through the landscape plan that we talked about previously. Thank you.

I guess this is maybe a broader question for staff. So Fairview Gardens, one of the things that I think is so amazing about it is how beautiful of an ecosystem it is and that it really focuses on organic, regenerative agriculture. So I'm trying to get my head around it not having an impact on the environment if there was some construction in this beautiful ecosystem that Fairview Gardens has built. So usually when we do infill projects or CEQA exemptions, it's based on a a piece of land that's just cement or just gravel. This feels quite different from that. But you also mentioned that it's not mapped Esha. So can you help me think through how we're thinking about what this space is and to what extent it's an existing ecosystem we're impacting?

Yeah, I think it's important to remember in the proposal that the majority of the land that's used on the site will remain as agriculture or farming. The new construction that's proposed, some of it's replacing existing structures. Some of it is... replacing existing temporary structures. So I think the net intensity of the new structural square footage is not as much as it could be. You know, I think The primary thing is that it's a farm and it's going to be remaining a farm. And the new structural development is intended to support the farm and the community.

And so, for example, where the farm worker housing is, that will be mostly replacing agricultural fields or sort of what's there right now?

I would turn to the applicant to tell us exactly what's there now.

Thank you, Commissioner and staff. This was one of the outlined ag support use areas of the conservation easement. There's only a couple areas that we can use. There used to be housing in this location, so housing next to housing made sense. That's one of the reasons for the siting of this location. There isn't anything there now. And it is not map dash as Brian has mentioned also if you know the proposed construction is modular units So very short low impact construction methods are needed to get them installed Thank you Back to staff.

Um, so I know we also have a special event permit process with the city Can you talk to us about when we should be putting events in a CUP versus when do we handle events through a special event permit and

Yeah, there's special event permits and then there are temporary event permits. So special event permits are for events that occur in the public right-of-way or on city property. So what this would be would be a temporary event. And there are certain regulations within that section of the zoning ordinance for performance measures. one of which is the number of which you can have per year. And I believe it's over four events per year would require a conditional use permit. So it's one of the many factors of this application that triggered the need for a conditional use permit. So it's kind of packaged together.

That's helpful. Thank you. There was an earlier CUP process where the city was working with some existing housing and there was a CUP that required the applicant to move the housing at that time to the central development area. Can you help me understand what the impacts that the city had identified at the time were and why there was a condition to move it to the central area? And then I know now we're looking at kind of moving it back to that area. So I'm trying to understand what changed between those two processes.

Yeah, I think you're referring to some old entitlements from around 2008, which I should note also those have long expired because the full phase build out of that project was never completed. But I believe the intent was more of a design function rather than trying to, there weren't any impacts identified as far as I am aware. But it had more to do with design siting at the time.

Thank you. And there are some yurts on the site that are currently not approved, is that correct?

So they were approved to be temporary. That was, I believe, one of the phases of the previous CUP was to provide a temporary housing solution until a permanent one could be built.

But that phase five, I think it was, just never got off the ground.

So the temporary yurts were there.

So they were allowed until permanent construction, so they're still technically allowed as a temporary use?

I'm not sure if they would have expired. I mean, I think they would have been invested by that because they were built. But I'm not sure that the expiration of the larger CUP would affect the temporary housing.

No, there are setbacks. There's some conversation about sound setbacks for smaller events that would be 20 feet from the property line. Is there any differentiation between sound setbacks for small versus large events?

No, that would be any noise that was created by an event would have to observe that setback.

The staff housing is so there's nine staff housing units, one in the central campus and eight in the farm worker housing. But there are eight units with 16 bedrooms. So it looks like we have one parking space for two bedrooms. Is that normal for farm worker housing?

Yes, I mean, I believe what they proposed is consistent with our zoning requirements, yes.

And is that because it's farm worker housing? I know for like a normal residence, we normally require one and a half or two spaces for that same amount of space. So is it because it's farm worker housing that it's reduced?

Farmworker housing definitely has a different parking rate than, say, something like single family. I think that there's some assumptions made, yeah, for farmworker housing in terms of shared vehicles or work vehicles. I couldn't tell you exactly what goes into how those rates are made, but they're definitely different than other residential uses, for sure.

And there's a cafe on site. I was looking at the parking requirements, and it was nine spaces for the farm stand and eight for the farm worker housing, 25 for the barn, and four for farm support. But I didn't see any parking assessed for the cafe space. Is that incorporated in the barn parking requirements?

I think I might have Scott Schell come back up to the podium to answer that one a little bit better.

While Mr. Schell is looking that up, I just wanted to mention one thing about the cafe. So part of the farmhouse restoration and use of it is a culinary program and a teaching kitchen. So that's really an exciting part to have that use. And we'll see if Scott can find that calculation. Scott?

And actually, I have another question for the applicant that won't require Scott, so I can ask you over there. I appreciate the letter that you provided that reduced your expectation for number of events and size of events. One thing I didn't notice in here was any change to the number of animals. And so I wanted to check in. I believe there's a maximum of 100 chickens and 26 small animals. But I also saw your enclosure for animals was only 2,000 square feet. So I guess my question is, are you really going to have that many? Or could that number also be reduced, in your opinion?

That is a great question. I think when we originally developed the project description, we were strictly looking at what did the code section allowed. And in the small animals code section, it lumped everything together in terms of goats, pigs, cattle, and chickens. So we were simply stating consistent with this code section, we want to have 100 chickens. We do not intend to have any cattle. We do not intend to have any pigs. We would like to reserve the ability to have goats or sheep in the future. It's not the current. executive director's intention to have that, but we also don't want to limit somebody in 10, 20 years from having a goat on a farm. But you aren't looking at reducing that number at all? Not at this time. Thank you. It's allowed on a farm.

Aha.

Okay. What did you find?

I found it. I'm not sure what is in the staff report, but we did a zoning ordinance parking evaluation, and we did include the dining area at the city's code rate. We used one space per 250 square feet of patron area. So it was included in our table. I don't have the staff report right in front of me to see what the disconnect is there.

So what was the total parking spaces for the cafe then?

Three.

OK. And was your barn also 25?

The 2,500 was for the store.

Oh, sorry. I had nine parking spaces for the farm stand and 25 for the barn. I was curious if that was consistent with your numbers, too.

No, it's a little different. I think some of the numbers moved around. Our study goes back to 2024, and so I think there was some movement in the project design and statistics. But we did include all of the different uses within the barn, including the event space. We ran that at the city's assembly space requirements.

Thank you. That's very helpful. You're welcome. That's all my questions for right now.

I have a number of questions for the applicant. But since you mentioned the housing, I'm going to do an add-on for that. I have a question. There are eight units that are for farm workers. And then there's one unit that was going to be market rate. Who is that for and why? What's the rationale behind that?

Sure. Thank you, Vice Chair. Commissioner Pendeman alluded to this earlier. We are providing the eight deed restricted units for farm employees. And this is one in the farmhouse, so it's going to be slightly different. It could be for the executive director. It could be for another employee of it. It could be for a visiting lecturer who's coming. you know, to teach a class for a summer series. So we want it to remain flexible, and we are happy to ensure that it's not proposed to be short-term rental at all. But we need to keep it flexible with all the different, you know, say we have a visiting chef coming that's going to live there for the summer, things like that. Then I guess what I'm asking is why is it listed as being market rate? I think just to differentiate between the housing unit types that we have deed-restricted 100% affordable units and one that is not. And typically in housing discussions, you just say market rate.

Right. And one of the things that was indicated in the application was that one area, I guess kind of in the northeast corner, that you were going to put in an orchard. do some, you know, trees. And I remember almonds was one of them. But those require more water, as I understand it. So I'm just curious as to have you really, you know, thought about that in terms of if certain kinds of trees require a lot more water than others.

Sure. This is a question that Mr. Abelman will love to talk about.

Can you hear me?

Yes, we can.

OK, very good, thanks. Yeah, good question. Yeah, I mean, the plan for the replanting, which we started this last year of the farm, is no and low water dry farming model. We do have experience with that, and there are orchards that are existing there that have not been watered for some years. Interestingly enough, unfortunately, almonds have become the bad boy of the agricultural industry with the perception that that has been put forward that they require a gallon per almond. This is simply not true. Actually, there are thousands of acres of dry farmed almonds just nearby us near Paso Robles. So most of what we will be planning will be under that kind of system of farming, including nut trees. So that surprises people, but that's the case. Did that answer your question?

It does. Thank you. Then one of the questions, and I noticed that some of the comments from the community brought it up, is about the animals and their location. And I'm just curious, because they are separate from the rest of the functional area of the farm, as is the farm stand. So there's a lot of construction in the middle and then two ends. why it was done that way instead of bringing everything together so that more of the land could be farmed.

Sure. So that is really driven by the existing conservation easement. When that was established, it developed, I believe there's three conservation ag support areas, the farm stand being one, the central kind of ridge, and the area where the housing is. You know, that is it. The farm has to be 88% in cultivated ag. It is and it will be. That relationship so it made the farmhouse make sense for its frontage on the public street to be there We actually relocated the original location for the farm animals and compost It was on the northern property line and a neighbor reached out and was really concerned about Nuisances potential and we relocate them internal to the site, you know specifically to address that concern now

It was very hard to read some of the slides. It looked like the animals and the manure area were on the south side now. Is that correct?

So one is, if we can pull up the site plan, we can help describe it a little better. One, I believe, is closer to the library side. So yes, the south side area and then the small animal enclosure by the barn. Or actually, it might be vice versa.

Yeah. Oh, OK. Because I wondered how close they were to individual housing units.

I believe we have a dimension on how far away that is, Adam. And while he's looking that up, I just wanted to follow up on the number of events on the weekend that for the updated project description. It's around 11 categories. You'll see in some of the recommended conditions or suggested conditions, we're happy to look at not stacking these events or prohibiting certain things to overlap or during festivals not have other things during the week.

Hello, all. I'm Adam with Blackbird Architects. It is hard to read on the slide. The relocated compost that would be near the barn would be 115 feet from the northerly property line, and then the relocated small animal area that would be near to the south would be 320 feet from the northerly property line.

Okay, thank you. It was hard to envision that. And now this is a question for something that's close to my heart. Why was the after school program canceled? In your revised letter, why was that chosen as a cancellation?

Yes, I will be perfectly honest. It's because the development impact fees. The PM peak hour trips are $16,000 per trip. That was the main driver of our fees. And so I encourage every mom out there who needs after-school care to come talk to the city and develop an exemption for after-school programs. But yeah, it's extraordinarily expensive, especially for a nonprofit farm. It's not something that we wanted to do, but like I said, we started taking an earnest look at what we're doing, and we got the staff report and that calculation. It's not something I know our executive director wanted to leave for someone else to deal with in the future. It's a lot. So that's why. I just wondered, because I...

have some responsibility for a little girl who wants to learn beekeeping. She can come to a class. Right. The other thing I wanted to, about the lights, and I think this might affect some of the evening, is there a point in time when the lights will be turned off? Event or no event, just, you know, at the end of the day.

I will have the architect confirm, but I believe they're all solar axes activated low bollard lights.

Is that correct?

Yes. With the exception of the pole lights that are down by the farm stand. Right.

And then I have just one more question. You know, I understand 95 dBA... is rock concert. What's 85? Can you provide an example of what that 10 different, the difference of 10 would do?

I am not an acoustic engineer. It's 10 decibels less, obviously. But I think in this case, and what I know about acoustics through other CUPs that I've worked for, it's really how that sound travels and crosses to a property line, those thresholds. And our acoustic study talks about that noise level, I believe, It was at least 10 feet from anywhere on the property or any property line. As you saw in that example, we are hundreds of feet from any property line. And we did that on purpose to cite it in the center. So that's what I can share about that.

Thank you.

Chair Miller and Commissioner Sorokin, I just googled what 85 sounds like. And it says a food blender, heavy traffic, a noisy restaurant, or a hairdryer. According to Google. Thank you very much.

Yeah, I do have some. So I think these are more for staff. So Stowe House was mentioned, and that does have community events, like it's being proposed for Fairview Gardens. Are those, do they have a CUP or is that because they're Goleta, are they Goleta City property that it's a special use permit instead of a temp permit? Can you explain that?

Yeah, if it were proposed now, yeah, it would either need a CUP or a special event permit because it's on city property. I'm not aware of what the historical permits were for that particular project.

So just thinking about Stillhouse, like Fiesta Ranchera or, you know, Music at the Ranch or Old Time, 4th of July, do those – Is there a conditional use permit that those are operating under?

Like I said, I'm not sure. But if they were proposed now, if they exceeded more than four special events, they would need a CUP if they were proposed now.

I see.

I see.

Mr. Penniman, I could provide a little bit of context on that. There is a lease between the Goleta Valley Historical Society and the city for some of those events to occur. And they do come in and get special event permits from our neighborhood services department.

Okay, and is that something that Is that because it's own Stowe house is owned by Goleta. That's a special event and not a temporary permit.

Correct.

Okay, so they wouldn't hit that what for For permit limit.

Yes.

Okay Thank you, and then also I I guess there was an exemption for the after school program. And I don't know how possible or legal that is. Is that something that would be approved by the city council to change that, to waive those fees? And then also for the temp use permit limit, is that something that could also be feasibly waived by the city council?

Chair Miller and Commissioner Penniman, in terms of the temporary use permit, I mean, that is in our zoning code. So, yes, it could be changed, but that would mean going through a Title 17 code amendment and, you know, they would come before the Planning Commission. for a recommendation and then to City Council for action. But I mean, that is the way that number could be changed. That currently is not something that is being considered, but we could always consider it. In terms of the DIF fees, we do, under the Beneficial Project Resolution, there is an exemption for I think it's day cares, but child cares. And that's usually for licensed child care facilities. So I do not know if their program would qualify and if they'd go through the process to get designated as such. But for DIF fees, the waiver is based on things that are square footage based. GTIP is not square footage. So if they were going to have a building that was focused on childcare, the building, any of the fees that are based on buildings like park, fire, public administration, I'm blanking on the other list, library, bike ped master plan, all of those that have a per square footage number, those are waived under the development impact fee beneficial project resolution. Anything, the GTIP unfortunately is not square footage. It's PM peak hour. So that's not one that is listed in the beneficial, you know, we don't have a mechanism under the beneficial project resolution to waive GTIP related fees at this point. And I will tell you that other nonprofits, we have required them or are requiring them to pay that fee. They've gotten a waiver on all the other fees, just like Fairview Gardens, we have it set up in the staff report, are getting a waiver on all of the other fees because of the nonprofit status. It's the GTIP part that others have not. And we're applying it consistently.

Thank you. What else? I see the number 195 visitors in a couple places in the CUP, including condition 50, page 65, which seems to state that 195 attendees are allowed onsite without meeting the conditions like completed restrooms, onsite parking, trash enclosures, et cetera. Just wondering how the number 195 was reached for this condition. trying to get some insight into the think behind this number.

Yeah. Chair and commissioners, is that referring to 195 attendees? Yeah. So I think that's more related to available parking. So essentially, the way it's proposed with the on-site parking plus the parking that is at the Christian Science Church across the proposed easement, the library property that would not require trips to circulate back out to Fairview or Stowe to find off-site parking they could circle essentially within the site or across the easement 195 was that capacity beyond that it would require some circulation either back out to stowe or back out to fairview to other satellite parking areas that would require additional performance measures like signage and attendance and so mostly just like adjacent parking correct okay yeah great um i guess uh another question would be if there's any other locations in the city that have an existing cup that allows for

amplified music outdoors or open to the outdoors that you know of?

I can't think of any off the top of my head. I mean, you brought up Stowe House, although not a CUP. I can't think of any off the top of my head that have CUPs. One thing I would remind the Planning Commission is that while it's good for context to look at other examples, what we have to do tonight is focus on what's proposed here on this particular parcel. Absolutely. So, yeah.

I think this might, oh, CEQA exemption. You know, to be exempted from CEQA requirement, it has to be under five acres, the development. And so this is 12 acres, but it's less than four, I think, is the actual development size, which makes it qualify for that CEQA exemption, as far as I understand. Are there precedents where this has been, like... used or exercised?

Yes, there is. I'm going to let Hannah Park with our BBK legal staff answer that question. Thank you.

Good evening, Chair, Vice Chair, and Commissioners. Thank you, Commissioner Penniman, for your question. And just to clarify, are you asking for precedent in other jurisdictions where courts have opined on the five acre limitation or within the city?

Yeah, anywhere in the state of California.

Okay, yes. And actually, there is a published CEQA decision that came out a few years ago. It's called Protect Tustin Ranch versus City of Tustin, where there was an existing Costco center that exceeded five acres. I believe it was about 12, approximately 12 acres, and they were proposing to build a a gas station on that existing site. And so the petitioners had challenged the five acre limitation, arguing that because the existing shopping center was more than five acres, the city could not rely on the class 32 exemption. And there the court clearly found that the class 32, with respect to the five acre limitation, really is looking at the actual development footprint within the existing shopping center. And so, you know, notwithstanding the entire 12 acre shopping center, they looked at, okay, where's the construction? Where's the new development occurring? Where is the change actually occurring? And there the court found that the city properly applied the class 32 based on the actual development footprint, which I believe was 2.38 acres. And so similarly here, the entirety of the Fairview Garden site does exceed five acres. But in terms of the proposed project that is before you tonight, really is only impacting about 3.4 acres. And, you know, based on the site plans, it's very clear that You know, it's only certain portions of the entire site, and the totality of that is under the five-acre limitation and therefore falls within the Class 32 exemption.

All right. Thank you. Yeah, that's the only one that kind of stood out as raised an eyebrow, but the staff feels pretty comfortable in the CEQA exemption meets all those criteria. That's correct, yes. Great. Thank you.

And to Chair Miller and Commissioner Penman, if you're also asking if the city's approved other class 32 exemption projects, the answer is yes. I can think of at least three or four in the last couple of years. Stork Medical, the housing project at the corner of Los Canaros and Cali Real.

Were those all under five acres, though? Oh, yes. Yeah, so this is kind of weird because it's like it's more than five acres, but the development is, yeah. Just wanted to make sure I understood that right. And I think this is my last question, but in the general plan, land use 7.5, I believe the Fairview Gardens is protected as a heritage farmland. Two questions. One, do I understand that correctly? And two, if so, does changing the intensity of use for heritage farmland trigger a city council or voter decision?

Chair and Commissioners, to answer your first question, yes, Fairbury Gardens is mentioned several places in the general plan, including the section that you're referring to there. And the answer to your second question is no, it would not require an amendment to the general plan. I think that's what you were asking that.

Yeah, it was really hard to read it. And I know we voted on Measure G at some point, which basically says you can't change this farmland, this agricultural land, without the vote of the people. And I was just wondering how that triggers. Like, when would that trigger for Fairview Gardens? Would it be, we're going to put houses on it, that requires a vote of the people, or we're going to do, you know, large events, that is the trigger. I'm trying to understand that a little bit.

Chair and Commissioner, I don't recall. Maybe Ms. Kai can help me. Do you recall what acreage Measure G applies to for farm conversion?

I believe it's 10 acres or more. That's for somebody to apply for a conversion of agricultural land to some other land use. And, you know, there are a few other technical requirements, too. But by and large, substantively, it is an application for conversion of 10 or more acres of agricultural land to be rezoned to something else.

And since there's not a rezone here, that wouldn't be triggered?

Correct.

Okay. Correct. And Chair and Commissioners, it's important to note that the structural development is intended to support the ag use, which is primarily the goal of parcels in that zoning designation.

You bet. That's clear. Thank you. No more questions.

A couple of quick follow-up questions. So as we were talking about the CEQA exemption where they were looking at the 3.4 acres or the 12.3 acres, to what extent does the events component play into that? So there's the construction piece, which is clearly less than the five acres, but then there's also the use of the land for events. But if we're looking at a COP application but they didn't have a construction piece, there wouldn't be a CEQA requirement. Is that correct?

Chair and commissioners, could you ask that last part of your question?

There's two pieces of this, right? There's a construction project and several construction projects. And then there's also all of the events. And the events are really going to go throughout the 12.3 acres or the full area of the land. More than five acres would be impacted by events in different ways. But the construction is limited to under five acres. So I guess my question to you is, if this was a CUP only for events and we weren't looking at construction, it wouldn't require CEQA. Is that right?

just for events yeah like if we were just doing a conditional use permit to allow for more than four events a year and some of the additional traffic impacts would that be something that would trigger sequa generally not i mean it would depend on the scale of what was proposed of course um but if if it were just something like this no um i i think i'll ask the applicant clarify this a little bit, but I believe that all of the event space though is on or in between areas that are within the buildable envelope or the project.

There's field trips and after schools and workshops that I imagine are going to go throughout the farm space. So I guess that's the question maybe to Ms. Hanna-Park, if the scope of the events impacts the acreage or not, I guess is what I'm trying to understand.

Sure. Thank you for your question. So if I'm understanding correctly, if the proposed project was just the events and not actual physical development. So presumably in your hypothetical, if it was just field trips that were traversing through the site, whether CEQA would be triggered, it depends on the specific proposed project, if there would be any impacts and things like that. In terms of the class 32 exemption and looking at whether the events would impact the five-acre criteria. I do think that would be fact-specific. And to Mr. Highfield's point, I do believe that the proposed events here, you know, all are confined to the event space that is being proposed to be built and, you know, impacted such that it would still fall within the, you know, it was all counted towards the five-acre limitation. One other thing I would note is, is, and I think this is similar to a public comment that was submitted yesterday before tonight's hearing, which is this idea of, well, the CUP will impact the entirety of the operations of the Fairview Gardens, not just limited to the 3.4 acres that the city is accounting for. But the city's response there is, I think the court in the Protect Tustin Ranch made it very clear, you know, going back to that Costco analogy or that example that the court looked at is, you know, presumably adding that Costco gas station to an existing Costco shopping facility would impact the operations of the entire Costco, right? It may impact people traversing to not just get gas at the, not to fill up their car to get gas, but then to go to the Costco to do some grocery shopping and you know, maybe impacting traffic circulation and things like that. But regardless, the court really there focused on the development footprint of what actually was being physically changed. And so while presumably maybe in the theoretical or overall looking at the existing shopping center, Yes, adding that gas station could have impacted the entire operations, but under CEQA and for purposes of the class 32 and determining what qualifies as the five acre, the court really there focused on the physical footprint of that site. And so I think similarly here, whether the events impact the entirety of the operation of Fairview Gardens. Under Class 32, really what we're looking at and focusing on is the physical footprint of what is being changed here.

Thank you. Those are really helpful. And then I have just two last quick questions for the applicant. So my first one is, you provided so many reductions here. I'm trying to get my head around the different reductions. So I don't know if you can come up with this number on the spot. How many events, given your new plan that you submitted right at the beginning of the meeting, would be over 195 attendees? Because I know you've got lots of different types of events of different sizes, but those seem to be the events that would reach out into the neighborhoods or have You know, work trying to get out to the other parking lots. The 195 seems is just the on-site and the immediate adjacent. Sure. So, yeah, how many events over 195 in a year?

Okay, so we're going to count them together. Okay, thank you. That's more fun. So potentially a fundraising event. We have a 500-person max. That's, you know, rolling attendance for per year. So potentially that's, you know, one of the categories. A seasonal event like a Halloween event, a fall festival, an Easter egg hunt. Again, rolling attendance. Maybe at that point we would have something. An open house, rolling attendance. That one is max any given time. So we would have some control measure of we're full right now. You need to wait until other people leave. Farm field days are four per year. And then the annual festival and then the remaining three quarterly festivals.

So I think I got 14. One, two.

Seven. You got seven?

Because it was four fundraising, two seasonal events.

Sorry, event types, not including their frequencies, right? I was curious about frequencies.

How often would there be an event over 195 people?

Potentially, right. 14. 14, okay. Thank you. Sure.

Oh, and sorry, one last question. There was a public comment letter that had mentioned that maybe some of the bass sounds might not have been incorporated into the acoustic assessment. Could you speak more to that?

I cannot speak more to that. Yes, I don't know that level of acoustic engineering. Okay. Thank you.

Not yet? I have a couple of questions, and then we're going to get to public comment. This is for the applicant. Because you have contracts for parking with your neighbors, two of who are churches, at least two, what about Sundays? Aren't they busy parking their own cars there on Sundays?

Yes, thank you, Chair Miller. That's a great question. So in development of those MOUs, we asked the sites, do you have restrictions? So they do not allow us to use the parking lot on Sunday mornings and also on Wednesdays. So you'll see some odd markups in our applicant project description table that says, except Wednesdays. So everything is built around to avoid those times and respect those agreements. OK.

And then when you talked about in your new letter that you gave to us this evening for open house, clarify attendance max of 750 is a rolling attendance. And there is a max at any given time of 150. Well, an open house is an open house. You're supposed to come during these hours, noon to 5, open house. So how do you control that, that there's only 195 people or, excuse me, 150 people that show up? At any given time.

Yes. I have worked on several COPs, mostly in the county of Santa Barbara. And a few of them have the any given time parameters, as well as the summer, the rest of the year parameters, which I thought might work well for this. I don't recall when we originally developed the open house Event and the driver for the 170. I don't know if it what it maybe was connected to But a lot of people use counters. It's just an operation management component similar to We went to the Dodger Stadium on yesterday and you go into the store to go buy a new hat and they said we're full You have to wait till more people exit to come in. So we just have to be a management coordination component

Yeah, and that sounds fine, except that, you know, most of these people that are coming to the open house are driving from somewhere. So they're parking their cars and then they're walking up the path to visit the open house and, you know, they can't get in and they're standing out. I don't know. It just seems like it. I appreciate the fact that you've that you're trying to think about 150 people at one time. But I think the. practicality of that with people coming and there being big traffic jams and groups of people bumping into each other and not knowing where to go to get out of the sun or whatever, I just kind of see that as kind of chaotic.

Understandable. We could think about how we could update the operations for it or develop something that's a better management tool or even up it to the 195 consistent to the rest of the references and the project description and conditions.

Okay. That's my only two questions. Anybody else? Quickly? No. No.

No. Thank you.

Okay. So we are going to move on to public comment. I'd like to ask the clerk how many public comment people we have.

Yes, thank you, Chair. For those of you on the Zoom webinar who wish to speak to this item, please use the raised hand icon. Right now I have 23 speakers' lips, and I'll have two hands up, so I have 25 speakers at this time.

Okay. In that case, with the interest of time... We typically do public comment for three minutes, but due to the high number of speakers and in the interest of time, I'm going to limit the public comment to two minutes per person. Okay? So can we go ahead and start with the speaker slips, please?

Yes. Thank you, Chair. We'll start with in-person speakers. Eric Ahnen, followed by Lee Chiakas.

Good evening and thank you for the opportunity to speak and thank you for the work that you are doing for our community. It's important and it's beneficial. The vision and plan that's been articulated here tonight is how Fairview Farms can move into the future. And that vision and plan has great promise. We have a huge asset within our community that has languished for a number of different reasons. But currently, we have an opportunity to take it forward and to put it in the position to be this asset for the community. I'm a neighbor of Fairview Farms. I live about a half an hour away from it. Half an hour? A half a mile away from Fairview Farms. But I got to tell you that the beautiful thing about this whole process, and I've been involved with this process before, is that we all gather here to talk about our community, to talk about the things that are coming to our community and how we can make them better. And what this process has yielded so far is amazing. The adjustments that have been made by the applicant all across the board, from structure to programs to their impact of animals, it states how important it is to these people that this project blends with the community, adds to the community. Any change is going to have some effect, but the beneficial effects of this project are way in excess of the impacts. I have two things specifically to point out. You have the option here of extending this process by waiting for more information on a lighting and landscaping plan. I'd ask you not to do that. This can go back to the DRB. The DRB has final review. That's their job. You look at the big picture, the zoning consistency, and let this project move forward.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Lee Chiokos, followed by Daniel Hudson.

Commissioners, thank you for the opportunity to speak to you. As a long-term friend of the farm, going back to the early 80s, I would like to suggest that you move forward on this and approve the project. It's been so meticulously looked at from every angle. I never thought there would be this much controversy about a project that has so much benefit for the community. And so I just want to thank Blackbird for their extensive work to make this project an absolute winning for everyone in Goleta. So thank you very much.

Our next speaker is Daniel Hutzing. He'll be followed by Donna Masalo-Chiakos.

Good evening, commissioners. I live next to Fairview Gardens. Let me start where I have since learning about this project. I support this farm, the farming, the education, the tours, farm worker housing, restoration of the farmhouse. I want it to thrive. And I want to acknowledge the changes the applicant submitted today. They're significant. It's 37 down to 27 events. That's a real move towards what the neighbors have been asking for. It's exciting to see. It's proof that the neighbors' input makes this a better project. But I have to be honest. I'm disappointed in how we got here. It took a lawyer a significant amount of neighbors' time and a substantially rewritten application, much of which was proposed today, to arrive at a proposal which is finally worth the serious consideration of this commission. That's not what collaboration looks like. It's not what neighborhood involvement looks like. It's what collaboration is supposed to prevent. And it leaves you tonight being asked to approve a project that's changed just hours ago that none of us have been able to fully evaluate. Even with today's cuts, one problem survives all of them. By the applicant's own descriptions, most events would still fall on summer weekends. That's the exact time the neighboring families are home and trying to enjoy Goleta. Fewer events don't help if they all stack into July and August. There's still no rule for spacing. So I'd ask you to require this or continue the event until the farm can prove that they're able to execute a smaller scale of events spaced in a way that works for the community before we lock into this larger permit for the life of the farm or whoever comes to operate it next. If we get that right, I think the farm will stay open for many years to come. Thank you.

Our next in-person speaker, Donna Marcello-Chakos, will be followed by Eric Cardenas.

Thank you, Chair and commissioners. My name is Donna Marcello-Chakos, and I'm in great appreciation of everybody showing up to voice their concerns and opinions and willingness to listen to one another and to come to a consensus. Fairview Gardens has educated and inspired people about food and farming for about 50 years. An agricultural island within a suburban community, many of these individuals were my former students at the Montessori Center School, located across the street from the garden. I remember with fondness the excitement and inspiration. of these field trips. The one-acre children's garden included in the new plan will serve this vision for future generations of children in their formative years and will expand their educational opportunities. Now many of these children have grown into parents of the new generation, and I have also become a grandmother in the meantime. How do we continue nurturing this legacy of Goleta as an agricultural community for future generations and respond to increasing population density, changing climate and economy, How do we educate the community, empowering urban and suburban dwellers to gain self-sufficiency, food security, nutrition, and bring all of us into a sustainable future? In my view as an educator, it makes sense to improve the infrastructure of Fairview, as proposed in this plan, to be capable of hosting educational events, inspiring classes and events such as the one I will recall here. Years ago, David Brower came to speak. My parents were still alive. I'm running out of time. My mother's 97. And also a renowned poet and farmer, Wendell Berry, who said, Fairview Gardens is a landmark, a source of comfort to all of us who love good farming and good food. It seems like a good thing. Thank you. Good land. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Eric Cardenas, followed by Steve Nelson.

This poll is perfectly placed for my crutches. Time's already going. Dang, hold on a sec. Hi, everybody. Good evening. My name is Eric Cardenas with Santa Barbara Botanic Garden. We are here today to support Fairview Gardens on the proposed project that's in front of you today and encourage the adoption of this project and the conditional use permit specifically. Like Fairview Gardens, the Botanic Garden has 100 year plus history in which we have operated with a number of restrictions to the use of our property, including how we treat it for employee housing, The size and number of educational programs we are allowed to have, noise restrictions, traffic flows, parking, a lot of the same things we're hearing today, which is interesting and unique. Very similar to Fairview Gardens here. We know from our direct experience that all of these issues are very solvable, which is great. However, all of these issues also combine to make it very difficult for any nonprofit to operate in a way that makes economic sense. But still, we do it for the greater good. We, and I know Fairview Gardens as well, do it to connect our neighborhoods and our communities to ecological health, to community well-being, to the biodiversity that surrounds and connects us, and in Fairview's case, to the food we eat and the workers who grow it. So to wrap up, we wholeheartedly support the adoption of the CUP. That allows our friends and our partners at Fairview Gardens to continue in their education and sustainability mission at a time when we really, really need more of this type of work. Thank you very much.

Our next speaker is Steve Nelson, followed by Mark Simonson.

Good evening, Chair Miller and commissioners. I'm Steve Nelson, living at 451 Albany Court with Fairview Gardens out my back gate for 28 years, since 1998. My main concerns regarding this pending CUP are with the size, frequency, and sound levels of proposed events and festivals.

Heidi, your work today, it came as a pretty sudden thing.

You've gotten some good work done on that, but I'm going to continue with what I've written, because this was just hours ago. I've addressed that in my written comments. Our neighborhood association, Protect the Soil Now, has retained legal counsel, and I'll let him speak in more detail to those issues and others in their comments written and spoken. I'm a supporter of Fairview Gardens. And like everyone here, pretty much, I think, I want to see it succeed. There's much in this proposal that is excellent. That said, when I or others voice our concerns about aspects of this project that will profoundly impact our lives on the perimeter of the farm, the response sometimes is not so respectful. It seems that if you don't embrace this plan in its entirety, you are a hater. I can't speak for everyone, but I think enough people share my feelings that all we know for sure about this project is what we read in the application. That is what we are responding to. If there was never any intent to have all these events and festivals at such a number and size, why were they in the proposal for so long? We've all been adults long enough to know that the words trust us don't really instill confidence. I want to see Fairview Gardens reborn, thriving, and verdant. I want to buy produce at the farm stand, bring my guests on walks through the fields, see kids learning about agriculture, enjoy a farm-to-table dinner, and bring my grandchildren to a fall festival. I want all this achieved in a way that is harmonious with the neighborhood so that Fairview Gardens is once again a tremendous asset to our community and not a nuisance. So I ask you, commissioners, to listen to our concerns and condition this project so that it works for all of us. And please remember, commissioners and applicants, we neighbors are the ones that put the urban in urban agriculture.

Thank you.

Our next in-person speaker is Mark Simonset. That'll be followed by Mark Weinshoff.

Commissioners, Commission, thank you for this opportunity. I live 1,000 yards from the farm. I'm a voter. I'm a citizen, resident of Goleta. I'm also a volunteer at the farm. I'm one of the beekeepers. The farm still has some bees around. I was reminded from my past in speaking tonight, this reminds me of the old saying, if you want a new idea, read an old book. I'm going to compare the old book to the old farm. And the new idea are the applicants, the farm I'm associated with's interest in revitalizing and improving. This is a program, I think, that can inspire the whole community, particularly young people. My earliest memories include with going with my father to a victory garden. This would be around 44, 45. We kept the garden 46, 47. Food was rationed. Then the price was controlled. And through those experiences at an early age, I believe I learned to appreciate food, to be self-reliant, and to appreciate hard work. I hope you'll take my comment under consideration and approve this project.

Our next speaker is Mark Weinsoth, followed by Janet Walker.

So there doesn't seem to be any question about the value of the Fairview farm. So maybe my remarks are superfluous. But let me just throw a couple of personal things in here. I've lived in Goleta for 52 years. And from 1988 to 2015, I lived about half an hour or half a mile from the Fairview Gardens. and my children both were participating in youth tours of the farm and they both came away with a greater understanding of where food comes from and the importance of farm in our lives in especially how far removed our urban lifestyle is from that and in fact My daughter now was so inspired that she's living a vegan lifestyle in Los Angeles and getting involved in urban farms down there But the impact of this farm is actually just not local. I was in Augusta, Georgia and I was approached by a woman when I told them I was from Goleta. I usually say Santa Barbara because people don't know where Goleta was. But I happened to say I was from Goleta. And she said, have you ever heard of the Fairview Farms? And I said, yes. I live right next door. I walk to it all the time for shopping. And we did shop in that stand frequently. That's where we got most of our fruits and vegetables from. And she said, yes. She was a doctor, and she took a tour of it with a group of doctors and nutritionists. And she became a donor and a great supporter. And I just want you to know, it has national impact. And I think the idea of housing on this property is great, because we're all looking for more ways to find low-income housing. These people would be competing with that. And so this takes some of that off the board. Thank you for your great questions, too. I'm my first time at the Planning Commission. I'm happy to see it's in such good hands.

Our next speaker is Janet Walker, followed by Robin Hutchinson.

We moved to the neighborhood around the farm in 1998. I'm Janet Walker. Of all the houses to consider, the one in our Goleta cul-de-sac seemed special because of the proximity to the farm. We attended galleries, gatherings up by the farmhouse. I heard David Brower speak in 1998 up there. I knew Cesar, shopped at the farm stand, had my white turnip phase. But then suddenly, April 3rd, 2026, the project site was posted with signage. CUP had obviously been in the works for years. We had no idea there was a project of that enormity going on. Truly an event venue in the works. What we saw was events, 6,000 total maximum attendees per year. Festivals, 7,500. Culinary workshops, max 20 per month, 240 per year. Max attendees, 24,000 per year. Thank you, Meraki land use. It's lower. I had been focusing on the effect on the neighborhood, but then I started to think about the effect on the farm itself, what it would mean for this number of people to set foot on Fairview grounds. The rolling admission is OK, but it's still that number of footfalls, still a large number. And where will they walk around? Will they walk around everywhere? I obviously defer to farmers about farming. I'm actually an environmental media scholar, and there are a number of issues that could be raised from that perspective. Yes, the farm was there when we moved in in the late 90s, but the event venue was not. Locals have been left out of the conversation where millions of dollars have been raised from sources out of earshot. Actually, we did and do need an environmental attorney from whom you will hear. I ask commissioners to please assert your role as planners and city stewards to help shape this project into a viable way forward. Thank you.

Our next in-person speaker is Robin Hutchinson, followed by Jeff Gill, followed by Tony Vallejo.

Hello there. With the Goleta Valley swiftly urbanizing its agricultural history, reducing it to murals of the good land, it makes even more sense for the Fairview Farm to shine on. There are certainly legitimate concerns that Fairview is prepared to work out with the neighborhood. But when hearing hostile comments related to working on weekends and things like that, I'm a biologist. I work Monday through Friday. I'd very much like to be able to bring my kids to a music opportunity where I can put out a blanket, bring my kids to a farm thing, learn about growing vegetables for my community. Frankly, I'm not going to be able to do that Monday through Friday. So I think weekends is probably a good chance. Fairview is not a mural or still life painting. It's a living piece of history that makes this region special. Creating a community space that we can all participate in as Gleetons is extremely important and hopefully Y'all will approve this project.

Thank you Our next in-person speaker is Jeff Gill followed by Tony Vallejo Good evening, my name is Jeff Gill.

I live on Via Fiore right next to the entrance to the farm and My wife and I have lived there for 27 years. We have always supported the farm and its activities. However, we have serious concerns about the scope of the project description in terms of the events and festivals. And I know that the scale has been scaled down, which I definitely approve of. I just heard about that a few hours ago. But I think it still sounds a bit much to us. I do need to comment on one thing. With all due respect to Michael Abelman, He compared the events at Stowe House to what would be going on here at the farm and claimed that the distance between the events and the homes was about the same. But it really isn't. The homes next to the farm are right next to the farm. Don't take my word for it. Go check both sites. See for yourself. Look on Google Maps. But bottom line is we love the farm. We want it to thrive. I just ask that you all take into consideration the comments and feedback from the immediate neighbors. And that's it. Thank you.

Our next in-person speaker is Tony Vallejo, followed by Gary French.

Good afternoon, Chair and Commissioners. I'm a former city councilman here in Goleta. I'm also a resident here for the last 25 years. I live no more than a mile away from Fairview Gardens, and I'm just here today to express my strong support for this project. Fairview Gardens is much more than a farm. It is one of the few places in our community where ag, education, and environmental stewardship come together. And it deserves full support. This isn't about changing the character of the property, even with the extra events. It's about preserving it. By restoring these historic buildings, improving operations, strengthening environmental stewardship, this project honors the farm's legacy while preparing it for the next generation. I respectfully encourage all of you to approve this project so Fairview Gardens can continue serving our community as a place to learn, grow, and connect. Thank you all, and thank you all for your time tonight, too.

Our next in-person speaker is Gary French, followed by Nancy Weiss.

Hi there, and thank you for the opportunity to share my support for Fairview Gardens. Another person who's in favor, but I have a little bit different perspective. My name is Jerry French, and I'm a longtime dietician, diabetes educator, and culinary instructor. And I teach people about the benefits of locally sourced organic food in this community. I have toured the farm numerous times with many adult education community members and also students at Santa Barbara City College, the culinary students who are future chefs, which are really important people to educate. And, you know, Fairview is a model. We've heard this before. It's more than just food production. It's ecosystem and climate resilience. And on and on we can go. It's all about education for children, for farmers as an opportunity to teach more farmers about the soil and how important the soil is. And I'm hoping also for education for health care providers like myself, because I believe farmers are health care providers more than a lot of the physicians in this community. So we've got an opportunity to do more education. So I just thank you for everything. And I really do listen to the neighbors. I actually wish I lived nearby, so I can walk to the farm and buy food, rather than have to drive to the farm. Thank you very much.

Our next in-person speaker is Nancy Weiss, followed by Glen Russell.

Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the Commission. Thank you for this opportunity. I'm here to speak in support of Fairview Gardens. And I'm not going to belabor it too much, because you heard all the different reasons why it's such a treasured place to all of us. It seems like there's good progress that was made already today on some of the concerns, and I really trust that with your guidance and the community's input, you're going to get it to that exact right spot where it needs to be. But I do support the project and encourage you to adopt it. Thank you.

Our next in-person speaker is Glenn Russell, followed by Janice Knight.

Chair Miller, commissioners, good evening. My name is Glenn Russell. I used to be the planning director for Santa Barbara County, but I am now retired, so I'm here tonight representing myself. What I see here tonight with Fairview Gardens is a very, very good project. When you consider the general plan, the zoning, the history both of the farming and the historical resources on site that need to be renovated, this is, I think, a project that deserves to be approved. The fact that it is one of the oldest agricultural conservation easements around is just one indication. It has affordable housing. It has many of the things that we need. And the CUP, I think, really is. for the community's benefit. And all the programs and events are for the public and the community. You have the conditions. You have the findings. You have a revised project description. So I think, I hope, I encourage you this evening to adopt the city resolution for approval of the conditional use permit and adopt the resolution for CEQA findings and the categorical exemption. Thank you very much.

Next speaker is Janice Knight, followed by Roger Aceves, followed by Phil McKenna.

Good evening. I'm Janice Cook Knight, and I'm a food writer and a cooking teacher. And Fairview Gardens means a lot to me. I've been visiting the farm for nearly 40 years, first as a shopper and as a CSA member. And then I started teaching cooking at the farm, sometimes through adult ed and sometimes special classes at the farm and assisting with the celebrity cooking classes. And the classes were really popular. People learned to bake bread, to make preserves, to make soups and salads from produce at the farm. And it was a really special time. I brought a group of kids from Santa Barbara Charter School that I'd been teaching once a week to cook. And there was one boy in the class, about sixth grade class, who would not eat any vegetables at all. And he was offered, we were touring the farm, and Fairview Gardens then was growing their rare white asparagus, which is like the only place in Santa Barbara County probably that anyone was growing it. It's just really unusual. And this kid loved this white asparagus and asked for more. And it was his Eureka vegetable moment. And I wondered about that. What was it, the freshness about it that appealed to him? I've often thought about him and about how kids are more interested in foods that they grow, cook, or discover themselves. Perhaps it's no coincidence that now he works for an organic farm in Santa Barbara. He has for the last 15 years. I'm speaking tonight for the countless children and families in the future who will come to this farm for education, for great produce, and for community. They will learn to grow food. They will purchase ripe organic produce from the pounds and pounds of food that Fairview can produce. That's a lot of food. It's a gift to my mind to have a farm in the middle of the suburbs. And I understand the neighbors' concerns, too, about the amount of people. I hope that something will be worked out that will be pleasing to everyone. This will be an even better Fairview Gardens than it was in the past, equipped with farming techniques that use less water and farming tailored to our current conditions. Thank you.

Thank you. Your time is up. Thank you.

For future families to have eureka moments.

Our next speaker is Roger Aceves. Followed by Phil McKenna.

Good evening. I had a big speech to give you, but I was cut down to two minutes. But having been on that side of the dais for 16 years, I know why you did that. In those 16 years, I saw different ideas come for Fairview Gardens. The whole idea is how to make them sustainable. Fantastic plan. I mean, fantastic report you gave today.

Fantastic report that you guys gave today.

This is the best plan I've ever seen in all my years in this city. And I've been a resident since 1983. I live a five minute walk from the gardens. I want to take my granddaughter to the gardens. And the idea of having after school sports, guess what? After school classes? Partner with a library right next door. You won't have to pay the $16,000 in traffic fees. The other thing I want to mention that has been mentioned today, and please give me a few more minutes, or at least another minute. On the northern edge of the property, it's deeded to the city, an easement for pedestrian and bicycle travel. And that's to get the students from Kellogg over to Goleta Valley Junior High School. The problem is, my councils never put the money behind to build that path. So hopefully, this current council will find the money to get that bike path built, because this city has the deed. And on a final note with regards to the fees, we as a city, as a community, need to support the nonprofits. And we've done it in the past. Ice in Paradise, as an example, $250,000 in traffic mitigation fees. City Council wrote it off because we needed the facility. So when it comes time for fees, maybe there's some latitude with Council, but the bottom line is this is the best plan I've ever seen. I urge you to move it forward today. Thank you.

Our next speaker is Phil McKenna, followed by Rachel Couch.

Thank you very much for all the time and energy and effort you put into this process. Living in a vital democracy, I was extremely pleased to hear the announcement this evening that Fairview Gardens had voluntarily significantly restructured the main issue, one of the main issues that the neighbors have. I think that is a tremendous gesture on their part. The city of Goleta is presented a gift tonight, a product of years of blood, sweat, and toil and millions of dollars for the benefit of the broad community. While you cannot please all of the people all of the time, you can do the right thing. Approve this project to revitalize Fairview Gardens tonight. Thank you very much.

Our next speaker is Rachel Couch, followed by Greg Whitman.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Rachel Couch. I am a Santa Barbara resident, an incorporated Santa Barbara resident. I don't actually live in Goleta, but I spent a lot of my years in this area, in Goleta and Isla Vista, actually. I am here to speak in support of the approval of the CUP. And for me, I'm impressed by the design. And I just wanted to share my connection to the garden with you. It's twofold. On the one hand, it's personal. I worked there in the late 90s. I was the office manager. And I saw the farm. saved by the community. And I was incredibly impressed, incredibly inspired. And it was an honor to work with Michael and Chava and Tom and Sandy, may he rest in peace, and Jane and the others that worked there at the time. And my second connection is that I'm so pleased to see this operationally diverse. I like some of the words that Michael's come up with. But this plan that is so holistic and it is so humane, it is so just to offer on-site housing for the workers and to be thinking so holistically and so thoughtfully and carefully about what this property could mean to the community and how it can engage the community and connect the community to land and to food. And the climate resilience piece of it is especially important to me. And I work in that field. And so I just want to applaud the plan. And I think there might be an opportunity for a creative solution, maybe trading some of the event ideas for bringing back the after-school children's program maybe there's some way to You know horse trade on that because I agree the after-school children's program is important.

So thanks so much Please approve the project Our next speaker is Greg Whitman and to note Susie doll and Josh Schultz have seated their time dim So we have six total minutes

Good evening, Chair Miller and Commissioners. Gregory Whitman with Channel Law Group on behalf of Protect the Soil Now, an association of residents who live in the neighborhood surrounding Fairview Gardens and who, as you've heard, support the farm and its community-oriented programs. On behalf of the association, we submitted a comment letter highlighting significant issues with the project and the claimed categorical exemption. The association does not request denial of the CUP, and echoing comments you've heard earlier, these issues are solvable. but they're not solved yet. The association has requested reasonable amendments to the conditions of approval. And these requested conditions are set forth in exhibit B to our letter. And at the outset, I'd like to emphasize one thing. What is before you will look, smell, and probably sound like a major commercial event venue when it is ultimately billed out. If you just do the numbers, you multiply the maximum number of visitors per event and the number of events that are permitted, at least until a couple hours ago, you get 81,500 visitors annually with 537 unique events, including fundraisers, seasonal events, farm-to-table events, gardening workshops, It is, to my knowledge, the largest entitlement for public events that has been proposed in the city of Goleta since its incorporation in 2002. It's unprecedented in Goleta and especially in its agricultural zones. Importantly, events that occur this frequently cannot and do not fall within the Goleta Municipal Code definition of temporary use because they're essentially occurring every day and effectively become the principal use of the site. A general plan amendment and a zone change would be required if events of this size and scale were to be permitted. For this reason, the project would not be eligible for the class 32 categorical exemption because it would not be consistent with applicable zoning unless the proposed events are scaled down. The association has submitted a list of requested changes for the conditions of approval. And many of the requested amendments are necessary because the conditions of approval as written are vague or unenforceable. For example, for condition one, what does it mean to say that the center is limited to five festivals that are estimated to have 1,500 visitors? Is that a hard limit? Is the center still in compliance if 3,000 visitors show up? There's another condition about what would happen on condition 44. How much would attendance have to be reduced if the off-site parking is terminated from 750 persons to 749? The condition doesn't specify. As for substantive amendments, I would highlight a handful. First, about festivals. The festivals should be reduced to a maximum of one per year with a cap of 1,500 visitors per festival. That's reasonable for the site. As for other major events. The further reductions should be provided, and I understand there's been amendments that have been proposed since that have not been reviewed. We should be able to have a clear understanding of exactly how many events are proposed, even to have an intelligent and informed conversation for the public. Next is about the spacing of events. The association has requested conditions that would allow the center to have a lot of events. In turn, they request that, for example, 26 weekends per year would have no events. That doesn't mean that they never occur on weekends. It just means that not every weekend is full of events. Another requested condition would require that spacing of 25 days between events with amplified sound. So for example, during July or the winter holidays, Every event is not, there's not a single week that is overwhelmed with events. There's additional conditions that could be made for enforcement requiring a hearing before this commission if there's, for example, three noise or other event violations in a 24-month period. We have retained a noise expert and an acoustic consultant to review the noise. And one of the issues is that this 85 decibel limit is measured 10 feet away from the source. But in reality, the noise would be experienced by neighbors at the property line. So a 74 decibel limit at some of these proxy locations would be a more realistic way so that it's not just an academic exercise in measuring it. And in conclusion, we would ask that the commission pump the brakes on its approval of the project. These issues can be solved. The residents are asking for reasonable conditions. There's no rush to approve what is realistically the largest entitlement for public events in possibly the city's history. especially when that approval is fundamentally in violation of the zoning regulations, we would invite you to carefully review the additional and amended conditions for the project as set forth in Exhibit B to our letter. Thank you, Commissioners.

Our last in-person speaker is Stephen Sherrill. Just a heads up for those of you on the Zoom webinar, I will be calling on you shortly.

Well, when you show up late, you got nothing left to say because it's already been said. That's pretty much the way I feel. Well, that's been said, and that's been said, and that's been said. But I will make one little small comment. I think for a long time, we've had this whole thing sort of upside down. We keep hearing claims that the farm is impacting the property owners. But why aren't we asking how the residential property owners are impacting the farm? We don't get that question. Like it or not, the area is legally zoned for agriculture, and the farm must be allowed to be a farm. The time has come to rise above the naysayers, honor, nurture, and show profound gratitude for this absolute treasure right in our midst. Let's stop bullying the farm and allow it to be what the good Lord intended it to be. Thank you.

Excuse me. We're going to take a 10-minute break. Okay. Before we go to the Zoom callers. Understood. Okay. Thank you. We're going to get started again. Thank you. Okay, could we go to the Zoom public commenters, please?

Yes, thank you, Chair, of which we have four. Our first speaker will be Ronald Cortez. If you'll unmute yourself, you'll have two minutes to speak. Ronald, can you hear me? If you'll unmute yourself, you have two minutes to speak. Ronald, can you hear me? We're going to come back to you, Ronald. We're going to go Linda Cobb. If you'll please unmute yourself, you'll have two minutes to speak.

I'm back if you want me to go. I think I figured you out.

Oh, great. I'm sorry, Linda. Ronald, why don't you go ahead?

Okay, great. Good evening, Commissioners. I'm Ronald Cortes, and I live at 5876 Via Fiore, the adjacent resident. Tonight, staff is asking you to adopt findings that this project is exempt from environmental review and the requirements for approval are met. I'd like to make clear that findings can only rest on evidence that you have in the record, and that's key for this evening. So I have five questions for you to contemplate and to ask staff in what evidence supports these findings you're about to make. One, the blank pages, the Class 32 exemption requires no significant impacts on traffic noise, air quality, or water quality, all four. There's no air quality analysis in this record. There's no water quality analysis. And the traffic conclusion rests on a study never released for the public. Where is the parking plan? Ask staff where the analysis should be. Two, missing plans. There's no landscape, no photometric plan, no information on lighting after dark. You're being asked to make findings without this evidence. More importantly, I disagree with the idea of the five acres and 12.23 acres. Your own project description characterizes it's not the three acres of the development, but your own project description says it's the physical site and it also includes all the activities. In addition, the project doesn't stay on the 3.41 site, 4.41 acres. It includes offsite. All the offsite parking is not contained within that 3.41 acres. Also, there's an exemption requires no significant noise impacts, yet the condition of point imposes scheduling limits, setbacks, figure orientations, and request mitigations to this effort. So finally, I would just say that this plan is not ready for adoption. Two minutes has elapsed. OK. Thank you so much. The plan is not ready for adoption. I ask the city or the Planning Commission to continue to review this. And especially, I'm putting on the record in my disagreement with the reading of the legal counsel.

Thank you, Mr. Cortez. Your time is up.

Our next speaker is Linda Cobb. If you'll please unmute yourself, you'll have three minutes. Linda Cobb, are you there? We'll try to come back to Linda. Are you there?

Yes, I'm here.

Go ahead. You'll have two minutes to speak.

Good evening, commissioners. My name is Linda Cobb, and I reside on Via Fiore. I'm asking that you please evaluate the severe safety hazards introduced by the proposed commercial festivals. This site is fundamentally unsuitable for large scale events because it completely lacks the necessary infrastructure to support them safely. To accommodate 1,500 guests, the traffic plan relies on five offsite parking lots. This logistical workaround forces hundreds of attendees to park offsite and navigate across Fairview Avenue and Stowe Canyon Road, both of which are busy high volume intersections. The staff report openly acknowledges this danger by requiring the deployment of a CHP officer simply to manage pedestrian crossings and prevent jaywalking. If an event requires armed law enforcement to safely herd hundreds of pedestrians across a major arterial road, the menu is unequivocally in the wrong location. Furthermore, the introduction of amplified sound into this quiet residential perimeter is entirely incompatible with the general plan's neighborhood compatibility standards. Using stacked hay bales, for mitigation does not solve the noise problem. It just highlights how fundamentally incompatible a concert is with adjacent residential property lines. The Commission is respectfully urged to recognize the unfortunate reality. This site cannot safely host crowds. Please strictly prohibit commercial events. Permanently ban all amplified sound on the property and ensure the land remains a safe working farm as it has been. Thank you.

Our next speaker will be Larry Cobb, followed by Christopher Cobb. Larry, if you'll please unmute yourself. We all have two minutes to speak. Larry, are you there?

This is Larry Cobb.

Go ahead. You'll have two minutes to speak.

Yes. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Larry Cobb. I have lived adjacent to Fairview Gardens on Via Fiore since 1988. I strongly support organic farming, the farming operation, but I also strongly object to this coup as written. Thanks for some changes that have moved in the right direction. I am speaking today to remind this commission of its own legal precedent regarding the proposed farm's employee housing units. In 2008, under Resolution 8-27, the City Council formally declared that placing staff housing on the north residential property line was considered to be a severe neighborhood nuisance this fact does not change even though the resolution expired the city legally mandated that housing be centrally centralized near the farmhouse Phase four of 2000 permit was fully implemented and the sewer and infrastructure for that central housing were successfully installed and inspected by this city. Today, high density housing is proposed right back on the residential property lines, contrary to that mandate. Relocating this housing back to the central Envelope is entirely achievable. The Land Trust has officially confirmed in writing that agricultural support areas can be reconfigured, authorizing net zero land swap allowed by the conservation easement. Furthermore, returning to the house, the housing to the central envelope.

Thank you, Mr Cobb. Your time is up.

Our next and final speaker is Christopher Cobb. If you'll please unmute yourself, you'll have two minutes to speak. Calling Christopher Cobb. Are you there, Christopher?

Yes. Hello. My name is Christopher Cobb. I live adjacent to Fairview Gardens. I live a block away. I'm speaking today to object to the city's use of a CEQA Class 32 exemption. This exemption is legally invalid on at least two absolute fronts. First, the Class 32 is limited to a project site of at least five acres or less. Fairview Gardens is a 12-acre parcel, reducing the project to a 3.4 development Footprint violates CEQA's prohibition on piecemealing. The CUP authorizes farm-wide activities that rely on the entire property. You cannot sever the support areas from the farm they serve simply to fit under the acreage limit. Second, under CEQA law, an exemption cannot be granted if a project relies on mitigation measures to reduce its impacts. The city's own staff report acknowledges that CHP officer and traffic safety um and physical barrier walls are needed for noise if a project requires these types of measures it does is not exempt by definition it has significant impacts i also respect this uh respectfully asked the staff to explain why the city reversed its 2025 determination last july the planning department informed the applicant that the exemption did not apply in an initial study was required the project's physical footprint has not changed since that since that decision because because the city is relying on an exemption that cannot legally be used because the acreage is too large and the impacts require mitigation the commission should re reject the class 32 exemption The only lawful path is a full environmental impact report. An EIR is not a roadblock. It is the standard CEQA tool for understanding and addressing real impacts on the neighborhood. We're simply asking the city to follow state law and to give this community a legally valid environmental review. Thank you.

And that completes the speakers for this item, Chair.

Thank you. Would the staff like to clarify anything on the record in light of the public comment?

Not at this time, Chair. Thank you. OK.

Does the applicant want to clarify anything?

Oh, Chair, is your mic on? Thank you.

Let's try that again. Thank you, Chair. Does the applicant want to clarify anything on the record in light of the public comment? I think you have a minute and 30 seconds for your rebuttal.

Thank you, Chair. I will say I have been a land use consultant for over 25 years, and I'm a certified consultant. And one thing that was instilled in me when I went through that process is planning is a public process. And I truly value the neighbors that reached out, that were willing to meet with us and talk with us and have robust conversations, because I do think it results in a better project overall. It helps for us to understand and hear these concerns, and I hope that's reflected in some of the changes that we made. I think if the commission is leaning towards moving us forward in some capacity, I would really hope and encourage you to encourage staff to detail the project description when it comes to the events very explicitly and completely broken down so that the events do not get lumped in one category. Because it reads like you have five festivals at 1,500 people. And I would really appreciate that. Moving forward, you will see some of the conditions that we suggested speak to some of those neighbor concerns about not stacking events and scheduling them on the same calendar week or not having guided tours occur simultaneously with workshops or having a farm worker manager to help with some nuisance concerns about the farm worker housing. That's all I had. Mr. Carlson, do you have anything?

You have 10 seconds, so say it quick.

I'll quickly read the CEQA exemption language that everyone's citing. The proposed development incurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. I'd highlight the term proposed development. Thank you.

Thank you. Do the planning commissioners have any additional questions to staff or the applicant? Commissioner Sirotkin.

First of all, I wanted to commend you on the flexibility and your willingness to work with the neighbors and, you know, to cut some of the events and the sizes and that sort of thing. And so I think this, you know, but I think you probably could do a little bit more. I, for many years, ran all kinds of events. And I looked at that list and I went, my God, I hope I'm never asked to do that. because you have, rather than saying up to a certain number of things, you've just kind of said we're going to have five of these and six of those, and I'm thinking, who is going to do that? I mean, I've worked on some of these things with a staff of 14 people. It's very difficult. So, you know, I think that maybe you might be able to look at some of what you have there and how realistic is it I don't, you know, even with 20 some odd, you know, employees, if a lot of them are farming, how many more do you have to do all these events? So that might be something that you could look at. And, you know, because I was just, you know, looking at them and thinking, my God, this is a lot of work. And, but basically, I think it's a great, you know, what you're trying to do is wonderful. We're just doing questions right now. Yeah. We're just doing questions. Oh, okay. Okay.

OK. Commissioner Penniman? No questions. OK. And I don't have any additional questions. So we are going to close the public comment portion of the hearing. And we will go into deliberations. So I think as chair, I'm going to ask each of the commissioners the five questions that the staff has put in their staff report. that they would like us to consider. And I think it will be very helpful for us as commissioners to go through these one by one and find out where each of us stands on each of the five questions. So what I'm going to do is I'm going to read the question, and then we will go one by one and have each commissioner answer their question. OK? So the first question is, should the applicant provide a preliminary landscape plan before planning commission grants preliminary design review in order to make the findings. And I will start with Commissioner Fullerton.

OK, thank you. I do think that we do need a landscape plan. I came from design review board, and I know landscape plan, photometric plan, those are some things that we would need. And because it's come to us now, you're asking us to make these findings. It's not a question of going back to DRB. It's with us today. So I know you are a farm. There's not going to be a huge amount of landscaping, but there were comments about trees, trees being removed. I know there's some landscaping that was specifically mentioned on the northern property line about maintaining that, but nothing else. So I feel like we need a full landscape plan before we can make any decisions today.

Commissioner Maynard.

I came into the meeting thinking that I would say yes and ask for the landscape plan. And a couple of things actually helped me feel OK without it. There's only one or two trees that are being removed. I thought that there was going to be more trees that would need to be removed. And then I really wanted to see where those were going to get replanted. I also did a site visit and was impressed at the extent of shielding with the pomegranate bushes, particularly on that north side. But throughout the perimeter of the property, there's a lot of shielding already in place, and that helped to relieve some concerns for me. But I suspect that for other reasons, this project may be coming back a second time, and that could be helpful to see. So I will say that I'm on the fence about this one. I don't think it's necessary, but can go with where the commission goes on this one. I will say that I think for the agricultural fields, we would not expect a landscape of plants. So those are areas where we just say – field with rotational crops is completely fine. I think we're talking about a landscape van would be very specific areas around shielding, replacement trees, maybe some things around the main buildings, but certainly not the crop lands. So I wouldn't push for this, but I'd be OK if the committee wanted it.

Commissioner Sirotkin.

Commissioner, is your mic on? Thank you.

Thank you. I have mixed feelings about it and kind of, you know, depending on how the rest of the committee commission feels, you know, I didn't really think or feel that landscape plan was necessary. But, you know, I could see where it would add to the final completeness of the project.

Commissioner Penniman.

Yeah, I have the same thoughts as Commissioner Maynard. I think Mr. Onan said it well. We can trust the DRB to make these decisions. It would be nice to see where the screening is, the permanent screening, strategic things, not the planted fields. But again, I could trust the DRB. If it happens to come back for a continuance, I'd hope that that would happen before so we could actually take a look at it. But yeah, I could go either way on actually both of those two questions.

Yes, I would like to say that if it's going to come back to us for continuance, I think it's a good idea for us to review the landscape plan. As Commissioner Fullerton said, you're asking us to make the findings based upon what we hear tonight. And the landscape plan will help us with that assertion of what we need to do. So the second question is, should the applicant provide a photometric plan before the Planning Commission grants preliminary design approval in order to make the finding? And this time I'm going to start with Commissioner Penniman.

Yeah, it's the same for the previous question. I don't think it's a hard requirement for me.

Commissioner Sirotkin.

And as I said, I'm kind of the same as Commissioner Penniman.

Commissioner Maynard.

I was impressed with the limited amount of light that was planned by the applicant. So I guess I would like to see specifics in the proposal of where those light limits would be. I think we didn't get a lot of that in the proposal, which leads me to think we might need to see a photometric plan, but also that a better understanding of the lighting for events, particularly evening events, would be helpful for me.

Commissioner Fullerton.

Yeah, I agree. I think this is, for me, more important than the landscape plan, actually. I know that from what it said, there's not that much lighting, but it goes both ways. I'm concerned that the lighting could be too bright affecting the neighbors. We've had several cases come before us for just this reason, where the neighbors were impacted negatively because there were not plans done ahead of time. And the applicant had to go back and actually take out the lights and redo them, which we wouldn't want to see that happen. And also just the risk. You are talking about having evening events with large amounts of people. I think you need to make sure you have enough light. And also they're going to be leaving those events and going through the neighborhoods to get to their cars. So I think it may need more light than We think. I mean, it would be nice to say, oh, there's not going to be a lot of light there. But I don't know.

I just think a plan is necessary.

I would not support this without a photometric plan tonight.

And I would say that, yes, I would definitely like to see a photometric plan before we decide. Okay.

Just a question for the staff. Would this be going to the DRB for approval, the photometric lighting plan and the landscape plan, even if we were to approve it tonight?

Yes. The projects go back to designer review for final following and approval from the decision maker. I just want to make sure I was understanding that correctly. And Ms. Prossy has something to add as well.

So yes, but that is for final. Typically that's for final review. The decision about whether it's appropriate or not happens at preliminary review. And it typically is a requirement to have the photometric plan to document that it meets the requirements of our lighting section in Title 17. I don't remember exactly what chapter that is, but the photometric plan provides the documentation that the .1 foot candles are met at the property line. And at this point, we don't have that information, but if you felt like that would be okay based on what's proposed, that is in the realm of possibility.

Thanks for the clarification.

Okay.

Yes, go ahead. This is a little off topic, but it's related to the planning documents. So in terms of acoustics, typically we do get like an acoustical plan that also shows that it's not going to go over 65 decibels at the property line. Do we have that information from other things that they've submitted to us?

Chair and commissioners, yes, that information is in the acoustical analysis provided by the applicants.

And that meets that 65 decibels at the border? That's correct. Including for all the events? Correct. OK, thank you.

OK, we're going to go to the third question, which is, is the siting of the farm worker housing complex appropriate? Commissioner Fullerton.

I do want to say I think it's great that there is this affordable housing. totally support that. I could go either way on this siting. It's interesting how in the past the city required it to be in the middle of the project. But I know things have changed a lot in terms of housing in the last few years, especially a few years. So I could go either way on this. I think I want to see how other people feel.

I feel like this is actually a very appropriate spot for the farm worker housing. It provides confidentiality and some privacy to the farm workers, moving them away from the more public parts of the farm. So I think that that's a good choice. It does fit with the easements that are allowed with the property. It does split out a little bit of the traffic, so you have a very low amount of traffic for the eight cars coming in at the corner. I felt better knowing that that's really a culvert and is not an established creek base, because I was a little concerned about the road going across the creek. But here I got clarification from staff that that was just a culvert and not a creek and not an ESHA. So having less concerns about the road going across there. And then also impress, again, when I looked at this site, and I'm very impressed that you can do this with taking as few trees out as you're saying, because I thought you'd have to take a lot more trees looking at the space. So I think that you're hitting a lot of those points for me. In terms of neighborhood compatibility, it is set back more than would typically be required by our zoning code. And we are moving to a space where we're intermixing higher density housing with single-family housing We're seeing that in a variety of projects throughout the city. We're seeing that with the new state standards, so I Don't think it's incompatible simply because it is higher density So I support the site of the farm worker housing Commissioner Sirotkin

I would agree. I think it's, you know, it would be, I wouldn't want to live in the middle of where all the other activity is going on and certainly doesn't give them any privacy or security for their own residences. But it's very hard for me to look at those drawings and the buildings that I saw in the illustrations as high density because they are basically, it looks like it's four small buildings and all one story, so it's not looming over the neighborhood or the street or anybody's home. And so I think, and it's far enough away from the actual property line that I don't really think it's going to impinge on anyone. I think it is a better use of the space.

Yeah, as far as acceptable use, it's clearly called out in the general plan that farm worker housing is acceptable as far as the placement. This does sound like a I don't have any problems with it as well. I think Maynard said it as more eloquently than I could. But yeah, that's what the trust has set aside as an envelope for housing. And yeah, I think it is appropriate.

Yes, and I am totally in support of the farm worker housing and where it's sited. The next question is, are the number, size, and timing of programs and events appropriate for the site, or should there be a reduction in the number and size of events and or the hours scaled back for the outdoor events?

Commissioner Penniman.

I think I turned it off. There we go. Well, as of a couple hours ago, I would say no. I appreciate the reduction in number, size, and timing. I think that I need a little time to digest it. Also, the public probably needs to digest it a bit. This is a public process, as you said, and I think having a little time for everyone to look at these numbers and see them in the conditional use permit language that we're approving. And also, whatever we can do as far as to the applicant to keep events down to that 195 visitors, if possible. How many of those could be limited? with that, I forget the term, the rolling visitors. But yeah, how many could we actually fit in the 195? So we have the parking that is adjacent to the property. We don't have people crossing the streets. We don't need traffic control. How many can we fit in that? How many would actually be outside of that? That would be, yeah, I think that's what I'd like to see and probably why I would support a continuance.

Commissioner Sirotkin.

Once again, I'm agreeing with Commissioner Penniman, and I would suggest that you look and see how reasonable it is to actually, you know, host that many events that are listed here because I really think It could be cut back and expressed differently up to a certain number rather than holding yourself to having quite that many. I think it might be more realistic at least to start smaller and at some point be able to move up to something, but to be realistic with the staff and how many of these events could be handled realistically.

I am also very thankful for the letter that the applicant submitted right before the meeting, but am leaning towards a continuance because it is such a significant change right before the meeting that I do want the community to have a chance to look at these numbers and to think about this. But it's really clear that the applicant has done a significant amount of work to try to meet the community halfway through this proposal and that makes me feel really good about the direction that you all are heading. I also am thinking about that 195 number just because as we start to think about doing five different parking lots stretched out in multiple different directions, that adds a lot more complexity, a lot more traffic, a lot more interchanges, a lot of folks moving around, and also just trying to get them to the right parking lot. Because at the end of the day, our neighborhood streets are also public streets. And if it's too complicated to go find the appropriate parking lot, people park on the public streets where they're allowed to park. And that may really impact those neighborhoods. So I think one of the numbers I'm looking at is how frequently are you doing those events over 195, where you're really having to do that much more complicated process. And maybe getting that down to once a month across all the different events might be a good starting place. The other thing I would call out is I think the number of animals was really based on the full 12.3 acres. And you're not using most of that for animal rearing. So I would imagine that that number could come down to something that's going to be more reasonable for your anticipated operations. So I'd love, with a continuance, maybe having Fairview think a little bit more about What's really realistic in terms of the number of chickens and small animals that you'd like to see? And what is it that you're really wanting to do there? Because I think it's maxed out at the 12 acres as if the whole thing was an animal farm. And that's, I don't think, your intention. So I think those are the two places I would look at potentially scaling back. But otherwise, I'm really, really impressed with what you submitted tonight. And I just want the community to have a chance to sit with these really good changes that you've made.

Commissioner Fullerton. Yeah, I agree with Commissioner Maynard. I want to say first, I know it must be a little frustrating to not get past, but I think every single person that spoke here supports the farm. Everybody really likes the farm. And the programs, the educational programs, I mean, the arm-to-table dinners, it all sounds really awesome. And Honestly, right now, we can use all the local farms. We can get political locals going on in this country. There's people getting sick from food and they're saying, yeah, get local grown produce. That's safer. It's healthy. We all want that. I want to make sure that I'm clear on the record. I totally support the farm. I appreciate the compromise and the changes, but again, it is very last minute. And I think everyone needs the time and the public should have the time to be able to see everything and have it presented. And I would also encourage the applicant to just really rethink the number of events and the amount of people, again, because those concerns about the traffic and the parking, I agree with that. So I think it's close. I just think maybe a few fewer large events and also being really conscious of the noise as well. So those are my comments.

Yes, and I agree with what everybody has said. And, yeah, I think you've done a great job, but I think you need to nail down some of those numbers a little bit more. It needs to be more concrete about what you're actually doing in reality and in practicality. So just keep that in mind. I'm glad that Commissioner Maynard brought up the animals. Frankly, I don't understand why you would want 26 goats and sheep. I mean, 100 chickens is a lot, but 26 goats and sheep? I don't know. I don't think so. I think that's a lot of goats and sheep. So anyway, think about that realistically as well, please. Okay, so the last question is, should the applicant submit a formal revised project description with the accompanying plans consisting of more than the slide deck of information that was provided to staff on June 17th, 2026 for planning commission consideration? I think we're starting with you, Commissioner Fullerton.

I mean, obviously, yes. I think a formally revised project description would be really helpful.

I would also like to see that, and combined with a staff report that helps pull it together, I think we don't want to lump everything, but I do think there's some value in trying to understand sort of the total number of events, total number of events over 195, those types of Assessment is helpful, too, because I know I can get a little lost with the 15 different names of events. I'm like, OK, wait. So how often is it big? How often is it small? So I think trying to kind of group small events, medium events, large events is helpful in that description.

I actually agree that we should look for – we've identified a number of issues that we'd like to hear a little more information on, the lighting, the sound. I think about the only thing that we're not really looking for anything more on is the farm housing issue. But I think that I would like to see us get a little bit more information. But I don't want to have this drag on. I think it's a great plan, and I'd love to just see it fleshed out more and made real.

Yeah. Sam, I would like to see mostly the conditional use permit language adjusted with the new numbers to approve it.

Yes, and I agree with everything that's been said. We need to see a revised project description with all of those items. Do the commissioners have anything else they'd like to add to our deliberations?

I guess the question is, so is the next step, would we do a motion to continue?

Yes, yes, we will be doing that. I just wanted to check on any other comments or questions or anything before I close the public hearing. We have to close the public hearing before we do a motion.

Anybody? Yes?

You do have a question? No, a question or a comment. A comment. Go ahead. Go ahead.

So I just wanted to say to the applicant and the neighbors affected by this proposal, our job here at the Planning Commission is to rule on whether the project is consistent or not with the general plan. And looking at the general plan, it supports preserving Fairview Gardens. It's actually in multiple different sections through our general plan. land use element, conservation element, agriculture. And, you know, it's called out by name. It's an important resource to this community. It always has been. But, you know, when I saw the event sizes, I was taken aback. You know, it was ambitious and, you know, really kind of sounded like it was evolving into a principally commercial event venue, which is not what I'm hearing tonight is that's not what it's going to be. And you can see that the applicant is working with the community. So there's going to be a little give and take on both sides. The one thing that really stood out to me is land use 14.4, which is part of the healthy and sustainable food system and usage in our general plan. It's part of policy LU14. And it's education and outreach. And it says the city should collaborate with community organizations to provide educational and outreach programs on the benefits of local food systems, sustainable agriculture, and healthy eating habits. These events can be construed as outreach programs. They are outreach programs. They get people there, and they bring people in to learn about this. And it is written in the city's general plan to promote this kind of stuff. So I'm hoping we can find a happy medium. And yeah, that's it. Thank you all.

There was a couple of other things that came up in our discussion that if we're continuing, I'd like staff to think about in terms of the conditions of the agreement. There was a question about if one of the parking MOUs goes away, so maybe a requirement that they notify the city if any MOU is discontinued for reassessment of parking availability. potentially having some sort of reporting system of number of people at events so if there was an estimate but they far surpassed the estimate that there'd be some communication with the city on that there was some inconsistency between some of the staffers responses and the applicant responses on the number of parking spaces and how the parking assessment was done and i think that would be an easy cleanup and like the next staff report just to make sure that Those numbers are the same and also that that cafe parking was accounted for and called out. I think would be helpful There was also I had asked about the stormwater particularly as we did have some neighbors that had had some concerns about the stormwater control plan and the feedback we got from staff was that there would be a a design or redesign to current standards for the stormwater, it would be great to hear about that at the next meeting just to feel confident that we did get up to current standards on the stormwater planning there. And the only other thing we had talked about was potentially larger setbacks of amplification from the stormwater uh property lines for larger events so it's a 20 foot setback but maybe for the larger events i think most of that the intent is to have it in the center but if it could sort of be put in language that there'd be a larger setback that could be helpful with that i will broaden back out to say i'm really impressed with the buildings and design of the project i think blackbird architect did a beautiful job with all elements of the project And I think the built elements that are coming into this project are really going to be an enormous asset to the community. We went through a lot of detailed questions on the CEQA analysis tonight, and I have great confidence given the feedback that we received from all of our legal team. And so I feel good that we are meeting the requirements of the CEQA process. I do believe that this project is consistent with the general plan, and particularly with the changes that were made in size and scale tonight, and hopefully with some changes that we've guided you towards for the next meeting. we can get it to that right scale for consistency with the general plan. So I think we're going in the right direction for that. And of course, Fairview Gardens is an incredible asset to our community and has been through its full term with us here in Goleta. So I really am thankful for the work that Fairview Gardens does.

Yes? Final comments?

No.

Go ahead. Go ahead.

Sorry. I thought I was done. But the housing location, one point I did not bring up, and maybe it's for staff, is that Mr. Seves mentioned something about a bike path going through there. I don't know. There was no real close-ups on the gate and what that was going to look like for the housing. But making sure that there is a bike path going through there, especially if there is a city easement, would be great to see what that looks like. when this comes back, if it comes back. And then as far as the animals, I'm not so concerned about the animals coming from a more rural background. You know, they can be used for fertilizer, for mowing. You know, they're very helpful around the farm. So I think whatever the farm thinks is appropriate, I would support as long as it's within the, Zoning for the site sequel I also agree the class 32 exemption meets all the criterias after explanation from legal and The large events, you know as far as like the scariest thing for me is writing in permission for large festivals, whatever you want to call it, into a conditional use permit that goes on in perpetuity. And I think that's scary for residents. It would be scary for me living next to it, too. But as a planning commissioner, I am hesitant there. So for those large festivals, the question is, would it be acceptable to have temporary permits for those really big two to four times a year permits. Would that be feasible and still economically sustainable for the farm? I don't know. Just something I wanted to put out there. That's it.

Just on the bike path, I think the only thing that I remember reading in the land trust letter was that there was some restrictions the land trust, I think, might have had about having open pedestrian or bikeways through the property. And I'm going off of memory from the hundreds of comment letters I read over the weekend, so I may not be accurate on that. But we should double check with the land trust guidelines there.

Chair Miller, can I please ask you, if the direction of the Planning Commission is to entertain a motion to continue, then I would suggest that you not close the public hearing.

Oh, OK. Thank you. So is that what we want to do, to continue the hearing? Anybody not want to continue the hearing?

I make a motion to continue. Can I get a second? I'll second that motion.

Okay. Can we get a roll call vote, please?

Yes. Thank you, Commissioners. If you would please lock in your votes. Commissioner Fullerton? Yes. Commissioner Maynard?

Yes.

Commissioner Penniman? Yes. Vice Chair Sorokin?

Yes.

Chair Miller?

Yes.

And we will now close the public hearing.

Okay. We want the public hearing open or closed? Oh, no, we're keeping it open. I see. I'm sorry. I get it. Yes. I'm sorry. I take back what I said. We are not closing the public hearing. We are keeping the public hearing open. That's for the record. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Next item.

Well, just this. Okay. So we have to, I'm sorry, we have to continue our meeting, folks. So our next item on our agenda is planning director comments, but we'll ask if planning manager Lisa Prossy has any comments.

I do. Advanced planning wanted me to share that the local coastal program has been released for public review and comment. And that public review period will remain open through August 26th. The draft LCP includes policies as a new element of the city's general plan and implementing zoning regulations applicable to the city's coastal zone. The documents are available on the city's website. which is www.cityofgalitaalloneword.org backslash or forward slash LCP. You can submit comments. Oh, there's an email address, which is lcp at cityofgalita.gov. And then following the public review period, city staff will evaluate the comments received and prepare revisions as appropriate for public hearings before the Planning Commission, City Council, and eventually the Coastal Commission. I do know that Advanced Planning is looking at scheduled hearings before the Planning Commission in the fall. So it's in the works. So that's it.

Do we have a scheduled next meeting?

Oh, we do not. We have not canceled it, but we will now because I wasn't sure what you were going to do tonight. But, no, we do not have any items for July 27th. So your meeting will be canceled. Okay. We do have an item, as you know, for August 10th.

August 10th, yes, that's for the Anthem Church. OK. And we don't know when this will come back to us.

We want to have enough time to make sure everything is dialed in appropriately and not . We want to do it appropriately.

Excellent. Any final Planning Commission comments?

Just one question about the LCP amendment. So that's going to be our draft that will go back to the Planning Commission for hopefully final approval.

You will be reviewing it and making a recommendation to city council. City council will make a decision for the city, but it will not become effective until it goes to the Coastal Commission. And we do not know what the Coastal Commission, you know, what they'll do and whether what we give them is what we'll get back of something that we feel comfortable with. So there is a process.

Yeah, so this is a draft incorporating all the comments that were made previously?

Yes.

OK. Just trying to understand the process, but you made it clear. Thank you.

Anything else? If not, can we get a motion to adjourn? I'll motion to adjourn.

I'll second.

OK, roll call vote, please.

Commissioners, if you please lock in your votes. Commissioner Fullerton? Yes. Commissioner Maynard? Yes. Commissioner Penniman? Yes. Vice Chair Sirotkin? Yes. And Chair Miller?

Yes. Meeting adjourned.