Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

of each other.

Thank you. Thank you.

Hello everyone. This is the regular meeting of the House Reigning Commission on March. The meeting is now called to order and it is 6 p.m. Staff, please call. Chair Carla Torres Duna here. Vice Chair Peter Hernandez here. Commissioner Dean Perez here. Commissioner Rodriguez present. Commissioner Steven Bone present. And would anyone like to help us lead a pledge of allegiance?

Ready. So with I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. This is public input. Um this is a time for anyone in the audience to speak on any item not on the agenda and within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. Bigger cards are available in the lobby and are to be completed and given to staffs before speaking. When the commission secretary calls your name, please come to the podium, state your name and city for the record and speak to the commission. If you're joining us by Zoom, please click on the bottom of your screen to raise your hand. If you're joining us by Zoom using a cell phone, please press star 9. Each speaker will be limited 3 minutes unless we see otherwise we have too many with a maximum of 30 minutes. Please note that state law prohibits a commission from discussing or taking action on any item. Do we have public comment?

No public public comments on the same. Thank you. And next we have consent agenda. Do we have any questions from the commission on the items in consent agenda or are there any items that commission would like to pull over further discussion? Okay. Uh staff, do we have any public comments on items from the consent agenda? No public comments on the consent agenda. Thank you. Do we have a motion to approve the consent agenda? So move second.

All in favor? I I I have and any motion carries and may we have item number 6.1 2040 general plan and revised climate action plan. May we have a staff report?

Good evening and madam chair. about how hopefully development director and assistant city manager um tonight before you will approve to bring forward six separate items in total for your consideration and recommendation to the city council regarding the general plan update housing element and other supportive documents. As you will hear, there is some overlap in regard to these documents and staff have structured them on the agenda to make the best sense of that publication. And at all, uh, tonight's items will be presented by a very knowledgeable and familiar group of staff and consultants. Each project to answer any questions you have throughout the process. And with that, we will go ahead and introduce Mr. available early to present the general plan and fut is also been absolutely supportive.

Good evening commissioners. Um my name is David Early and I am a principal consultant principal with place works. My has been working on this general plan with your staff. There are planning commissioners. There are city council for actually about six years now. And we're very happy that we are here at what we believe to be the finish line. I'm ready for you to hopefully take action on this general plan as your first item tonight and then the five subsequent and related items that you'll be looking at as well. Um it's been a pleasure working with Eva with Rod and with the other staff here. Uh I have been on this project for the entire time. My associate Greg Goodfellow is here as well and he'll be talking about the last of the six items, the objective design standards as well. Um, and we're available through the course of the meeting to help with other items if appropriate. Um, I have put together a slideshow for this first item about the general plan itself and the climate action plan as well as the environmental review addendum that goes with those documents. And so I'll just dive in and I will of course be available at the end of my presentation to um answer any questions you may have before you open it up for public comment and your discussion. And I should probably say and I I think you probably all understand this it are they are six separate items. So you will be hearing six separate presentations followed by six separate comment periods followed by six separate actions. Um there won't it's not like six presentations and then just one comment period. So you'll go through them in sequence and take action on each one before you go to the next.

So we're taking action to quick question. So I will take an action on them independently.

Yes. In order, right? So you'll you will take action on the general plan before you then hear about the housing and so forth. If you have questions about how they fit together, I'm happy for both I and Eva and others will be happy to to answer them when the time come. All right. So, um let's have the next slide. Um or am I? Oh, look. I'm in charge of my own destiny with that. All right. So, I'm going to talk about um the draft general plan, the climate action plan, give you an overview of community input that did occur over the six years, and talk about your steps this evening and moving forward on this both this project and the other five on your agenda. Um for the general plan itself, I think it's important to begin with just an overview of what is the general plan. Obviously all the US planning commission has been have been working with your existing general plan already. You're familiar with it. But I do want to state for you and for the audience that the general plan in California is um considered the blueprint for growth and development and conservation for every community within the state. Um every community both cities and counties are required by the state to have general plans. The courts have called the general plan the constitution for development and conservation um within your jurisdiction. And just like our federal constitution, you don't have every rule in the general plan. You have the basic framework and then you have subsidiary things like your climate action plan, your housing element, which is actually part of the general plan but has housing policies in it. Um your zoning code, which you'll be looking at tonight, the the development standards, policies that staff teach, those are all subservient to the general plan. So the general plan is the document that establishes your community vision and supporting goals, policies, and actions. It provides a consistent direction for future development. It's intended to balance growth, conservation, and quality of life. And it does also serve as a document about baseline environmental conditions. So you can track change as

it occurs over time. The general plan by law consists of a series of elements. An element is the word in the law. It's easy to think of them as chapters. That's element is kind of a fancy word for chapter. The reason they're called element is that you're not required to put all of these elements into individual chapters. You can combine elements into a single chapter. You can organize the general plan however you want. In your case, pretty much every required element is its own chapter. So there's almost a onetoone correspondence between the general plan elements as required and the chapters in the general plan. And I should say at this juncture that your current general plan um which was last updated in 2005 is a very good and robust document and what we're really doing here is amending it and changing it around the edges. We're not fundamentally rewriting it. So the overall structure of the general plan will remain the same from the one that was in effect um that was adopted in 2005. Um so you have a series of required elements within the general plan. Um you see those on the left hand side here. um land use in this case it's called land use and community design is required by the state circulation housing natural resources and conservation um open space and agriculture those two the the state only requires conservation by name and open space by name but in your in your general plan they have two slightly longer names and then there's a health and safety element the state requires an element called safety and the state also requires a noise element and noise in this case is covered within your health and safety element So that structure remains the same. Your existing general plan already includes a community services and facilities element and state law allows you to add any elements that you like um to that list of required elements from the state. So you have you also have an existing community services and facilities element that will remain in place. And this general plan update adds three additional

elements, an arts element, an economic development element, and an environmental justice element. and those are all added um new it document. Um the the general plan had a series of goals set for it when the update process began and the city council articulated these goals. The first was to engage a broad spectrum of the community in thinking about planning for Hollister's future. To establish a community vision for Hollister in the year 2040 to maintain Hollister's small town and agricultural character to manage growth consistent with overall community goals. to ensure highquality development, to support economic development, and to respond to state mandates and changes to the general plan guidelines that the state promulgates, all of which um had occurred since the year 2005. So, we are doing some things to just update and correspond to new changes in the law in the last 20 years, but we're also doing all fulfilling all the other goals that you see there as well. Um, one of the key concepts about the general plan is that it has to cover a specific area. And there are actually four different areas, one nested within the other, that are all important to know about in this context. The area that's most directly affected by the general plan is the area inside of the city limits. And I think that makes sense. That's where you have actual legal authority to regulate land use is within your own city limits. But there's also an area called the sphere of influence. And some of you are probably familiar with that. The sort of influence is an area that the local agency formation commission which exists at the county level has identified as an area that you may add to the city in the future. And so your general plan talks about both your existing sphere of influence and changes to the sphere of influence that the city would like to see and would approach the LAFCO the local agency formation commission about making those changes. So you have your city limit. You have slightly large

larger area as the sphere of influence which is the area expected to come into the city. Your general plan also has an urban service area which identifies areas that under some circumstances the city might serve with services even if they're outside of that sphere of influence. And then finally by state law there is a larger area called the planning area. And that is the area which even though it's not in your jurisdiction, not in your sphere of influence, but still an area that you believe has an impact on what happens in Hollister. And I think we can all imagine this that if the county makes certain changes outside city limits, those can affect the city of Hollister. So your general plan actually sets a boundary for that planning area. And what that does is it gives you the authority to make comments to the state or the county about changes that they might propose. They're outside of your authority, but you can say in your general plan, we believe this to be in our planning area. We believe this to affect us, and therefore we're giving these comments. And you can see on the map that largest area um is the area of the planning. Um there have been a lot of opportunities for public involvement in this process. Um um we were of course in COVID, but CO started the CO lockdown started I believe about a month before we started work on this project. Uh it was quite um unnerving at that time but I think we still did a good job with public outreach. We had nine separate workshops and events. Um because of the lockdown we did have two different sets of online activities. We had a general plan advisory committee which met a total of eight times. We've had four meetings already including this one with your planning commission. And by the time we get done in a in April with the city council, they will have had eight meetings as well. So there's been a lot of opportunities for public input on this process. Um we've also had a very robust website for the project. It's been up and running for this entire time period. Um

it's called hollister202040.org. I'm sure all of you have been there already. You can see the general plan documents on the on the website and you can also see the history of this process over these past several years. and you can understand all the all the input and process that has gone into the project. Um so this again gives an overview of this process um and a list here on the left of all the things we've done. You see on the graphic how staff, the city staff, the GPAC, the community, the planning commission and the city council have all given input to create this draft general plan. And the general plan includes an establishment of baseline conditions understanding what's on the ground today. It created a 2040 communitywide vision which I'll show you in just a few minutes. Um it has we looked at a series of policy options that gave people ideas of alternatives as to what might be done in putting together this draft general plan and then we prepared the draft general plan itself. Um we've now finalized that general plan in response to council direction. And I think you know that we the current draft of general plan is very similar to one that was done um several years ago. At that time there was a new council election that council directed that we take a different approach. Um when that was done just as we had finished that a third council came in and they directed that we go back to the general plan very similar to our first draft. So this third draft that you're seeing tonight is very similar to the first draft that was shown some years ago. There have been further updates primarily just to comply with changes of state law since the time that that first general plan draft was done but mostly at the council's direction. we've stuck to the very first draft that was put together um some years ago. So this um is a lot of words and I apologize but this is the entire vision statement of the general plan and I won't try and read the whole thing but as you're looking at it I think you can see it as a vision for the entire community for a 15-year period. It's

actually quite succinct. that fits on one page and it does talk about um Pollister being a place that welcomes all sorts of people to come and live, work and recreate and that people really choose to be here because of the high quality of the community, because of the surrounding agricultural lands and because of the many amenities that are here in the city. Um it talks about innovation of businesses in the downtown, the industrial park and at the airport. It talks about recreation at places like the Pinnacles National Park and the Hollister Hills Recreational Vehicle Area. It talks about transportation. It talks about community life and and flourishing and particularly the historic buildings of the town. And it talks about how new growth will be accommodated and but accommodated responsibly. So this is these are the key issues that come up in this vision. And then in addition to that, the vision includes a series of four community values. And there's um text about each of those. You can see here that they include equity, diversity, innovation, and sustainability as key values that the city of Hollister through this general plan really believes in and is seeking to um realize. Um one of the key aspects of the general plan is what's called the land use map. Um people are sometimes more familiar with a zoning map. the zoning map and the land use map are similar to each other. But as I said before, the general plan is at a higher level. It's more conceptual. And so some of the regulations about development might occur in the zoning ordinance, but the zoning ordinance and the zoning map are going to be consistent with the land use map that you see here. So the land use map, you can see um around the outside of the area, all that green, that's the planning area. Um, those are areas that are anticipated to be kept in agricultural uses. Up the top of the map, you see the airport in blue and the airport industrial park around it in purple and gray. And then you see the the core of the city a little farther

down. You sure can make out the downtown itself and the residential neighborhoods of the city. So those land uses are shown in great detail. There's a whole table of land use designations that show the types of development that incur occur in every one of those designations. They're all there on the map before it is published. Um and this is a summary of those land use designations. Um the residential designations are um the top ones here that is they go all the way from residential estate with quite large lots, low density, medium density and high density residential um to accommodate apartments and town houses particularly in central areas of the of the city. And then there are several mixeduse designations. a broad mixeduse designation, one specifically for the downtown and one for the west gateway. There's a north gateway commercial that does allow residential that emphasizes commercial uses and there's a home office designation. So these are the primary development designations within that entire general plan. So pretty simple list um looking at the city as a whole. Um and that's it for the general plan. I see that always if if it's acceptable I don't know through the chair.

Yeah. I just wanted a little faster. Oh it is due to AC the next slide. Yeah. These are dwelling units per acre. Say that again. Dwelling units per acre. How do you measure that?

Um you measure the land in acres and you count the residential units, the dwelling units and that's the number. So, if you're allowed one dwelling unit per five acres, that means that if you have a 20 acre site, you can have four units because 20 divided by 5 is four. If you have 12 to 35 dwelling units per acre, that means if you have 1 acre of land, you can build between 12 and 35 units on that one acre. If you have half an acre, you can build half a because the acre is not changing, so they can always go higher, right? Uh well some of these densities are low enough that you can accomplish them with one-story buildings. So you would expect in residential estate low density and probably even medium density that in almost every one of those cases they could they could be accomplished with one story buildings. It's true that when we get to the high density residential um and some of the residential and the mixed uses that in order to developers you have to build up.

Yeah. by default the introducing number requires you want to go higher

well and again you will you don't have to go higher for the lower densities but it is true that it it's very difficult to do more than I mean you know many resident many single family homes in many neighborhoods here are two stories tall um to go you you can build twostory residential developments up to about 12 to 15 units per so the higher numbers that go above 12 to 15 are going to go higher Well, how does the state measure that whether one whether that that density is even possible whether it's the 12 or 35? Well, the state doesn't need to measure it, but uh just sort of the way planning works is that you count all the units. If you have an apartment building, say with four floors, you still count all the units on all four floors and then you look at the number of acres. So, if you had a four-story building with four units per story, that's 16 units. And if that was built on a 1acre piece of land, that would be 16 units per acre.

I appreciate that. Yeah. Know, and I I kind of assume that my puts the burden on that assumes the moment, right? Um any implications of that by default, right? Your staff would be reviewing every application to make sure that it fit within those ranges. Yeah.

Thank you. Very well. Other questions? Okay. So, I'll go on and talk about the draft climate action plan, which is part of this same first action this evening. Um, the climate action plan is a document that is not required by state law, but it is very close to required at this point. There are a number of very strong advantages to every jurisdiction for adopting a a climate action plan. And through a series of legal opinions, it's really become the norm that you can't really adopt a general plan without having a companion climate action plan because the state requires you to show how you're going to address the climate impacts of development of your general plan. And really the only easy way to do that is through a very extensive climate action plan. So while it's not strictly a required document, it is very closely aligned and almost required by state regulation and some re some court cases. Um the climate action plan is a strategic plan that's intended to reduce the community's greenhouse gas emissions and increase resilience even as development occurs. And I'll talk about exactly what that means in a few minutes. Um, but it is intended to support the general plan's goals and policies and to allow for development under the general plan despite the concerns about greenhouse gases that we have here in California. And it includes both um a calculation of existing greenhouse gas emissions. It includes um projections of future greenhouse gas emissions. It sets reduction targets for greenhouse gas emissions. Um can set to the state standards. the state is trying to get down to a certain level. Every community has to do its part to get down to that same level. And then it has strategies to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions and meet those targets that are set within the plan. So those are the key components of the climate action plan. I'm going to talk about each of

those in a little more detail. Um so the um there was a um adopted you already have an adopted climate action plan. The council did adopt um both as you know the general plan and the climate action plan in December of 2024 as one of its final actions. The uh that council's final actions the general plan was rescended. The cap was not the climate action plan. So you actually have an existing climate action plan that was not rescended. However, because the climate action plan is tied to the city's growth projections, the new general plan requires amendments to the climate action plan as well. Um and it is a focused update then that replaces the growth projections to match this new general plan and that adjusts the strategies to continue to achieve those targets that were set in that existing climate action plan that you already have. Um it has a series of strategies within it. Um the um there are only um there's a total of 18 strategies. 16 are in the existing climate action plan. Um, and of those 16, 15 remain unchanged. Strategy 10 has been changed to include additional traffic reduction measures. And then we've added two more to make you more able to fulfill new goals that have come down from the state since 2024. And those are strategy 17 to reduce truck idling and strategy 18 to promote infill development. Um, in addition to that, the estimates of the greenhouse gas emission reductions have been updated to reflect the changes in the growth projections since this new general plan has been drafted. Um, this shows you progress towards the targets that's anticipated in the climate action plan. A graph very similar to this one exists in your existing adopted um climate action plan. And what you see in these lines, um, I I

love these graphs, but I'm that kind of a nerd. Um, the red line at the top above the green area shows what would happen, what we forecast would happen if we do nothing. And and you can see that the green only starts in the year 2024 because that's when that climate action plan was adopted. The line before that is a known set of factors that began in 2005 and went up through 2024. There's a single line there because that was history. There's no there's no forecasting there. Once we get beyond today, we have the red line at the top forecasting what would happen if we do nothing. We have the middle line between the green and the blue forecasting what will happen if Hollister did nothing but the state did what ZIP's planning to do. And you can see that there's already quite a big drop. Most of the drop occurs through the state efforts, not through what Hollister to do. But there's still a gap to get down to where the state wants us to be. the state wants us to be way down very close to zero and to get to that number and those the the desired number are the green dots. There are two green dots you can see quite well and there's actually a green dot on 2045 where the lowest line hits 2045. And what that shows us is that with those city efforts from the climate action plan, we anticipate that you will get to that lower level that's needed to meet your requirements, your obligations for the state effort. And you that you get that through the set of 18 strategies that are included in the climate action plan. So that's what that teal area is. It's the reduction created by the climate action plan that goes beyond what the state is already going to do. So it is a plan that gets you to exactly the level that you need to get to to meet state boundaries.

Yes. I'm sorry. Um so how do they come up with these moves? Is it is it modeling or is it Yes, there's quite a bit of modeling involved. And so how you mentioned the state has with their efforts to use greenhouse gases. Yes. What efforts have they done to

Well, some examples are that um the what's called the fleet mix is changing. That is the the number of gas powered vehicles. The amount of emissions from those gas powered vehicles is going down. The number of gas powered vehicles is going down. electric vehicles are going up. That's one way and that's pretty significant way. Another is that the the composition of gasoline and other fuels themselves is going to has changed and it's projected to be changed. Um the state is mandating that electrical power when it's when it's um generated is done through more environmentally sustainable ways. That's a big reduction. So there's a whole host of things. The state is doing many many things. Those are three um kind of commonly known ones that happen that are helping to lessen greenhouse gases through state regulation.

So where in that modeling does it include us buying foreign oil and the consumption of that? Well the it from a greenhouse gas perspective it doesn't actually matter whether the oil comes from another country or from here. there is the cost the environmental cost of shipping the oil from a far away location to here. Um so that would be included in those but but the the bigger issue is the quantity of oil being used not so much where it comes from but but the quantity itself because I I just it's my understanding that it's a lot dirtier than West

I'm not the technical person on this. My understanding is that it might start out dirtier. Um, and that's not because it's a third world country or something. It's just that various grades of oil are more or less pure, but that once they get to this country and they're refined, they are refined to be to meet US standards and in California the California standards. And that's where those state standards for the composition and fuel economy that the refining regulations require that it be made less dirty. All right. So, let me just go on. I want to very quickly mention really for the record about a draft environmental impact report addendum. Um, when the general plan was adopted in 2024, the general planning climate action plan, a full environmental impact report was prepared. The environmental impact report is anformational document. It descries potential environmental effects. It identifies any mitigation measures that are needed. It describes feasible alternatives to the project. H uh certifying an EIR does not dictate project approval or deny. That's a state. It's a step that a jurisdiction takes first to say we understand the implications of this project we're going to do. We've we've certified that EIR. Now we're going to take action. That certification process happened in 2024. What happened since then is that um the city council um having certified the EIR then repealed the resolution that adopted the general plan and directed us to recreate this new draft which as I've already said is similar to the first draft. So they adopted draft number two. We now in draft number three have gone back to something very similar to draft number one. The EIR is still certified from draft number two. Um so you don't need a whole new EIR. What we did have to do was an assessment of the new general plan, which of course is similar

to the first general plan, but it is now considered new draft number three. We had to compare it to draft number two and make sure that that environmental assessment that was done for draft number two still is valid. And we did that and under state law, we might have found one of three things. We might have found that we had to do a subsequent DI or a supplemental DI or an EI amendment. The subsequent EI and the supplemental EIR are both higher levels of review because either the project has changed very significantly um from an environmental perspective or because conditions have changed on the ground. We found that neither of those was the case and because of that we only are required to prepare an addendum and that addendum does not require formal public review nor formal city adoption. So, you have an extensive EIR addendum in the files, but you are not asked to act on that tonight because it does not require city approval or adoption. It's just in the file with a finding that the addendum is adequate. Um, with that, I just wanted to wrap up by mentioning community input that we've received so far. Um, I'm going to be summarizing a total of seven emails and letters that came in um, when the slideshow was prepared about three days ago and um, I believe that just today we got five more and those are being distributed to you on paper for your review. They are not what summarized here. So there's a total of 12 comment letters and emails. Seven we had previously, five we got today and I won't be trying to speak to them. You have them in front of you. If you had questions about that, you or I can try and answer them. Um the ones that we did receive, um of these seven, the first three are a request to change the designation at the northwest corner of San Bonito Street and Union Road from medium dens density residential to either commercial or mixed use. This is from a property owner obviously who

would like to see a commercial component on that site. um a request to change a designation of at build press road from mixeduse to industrial and a request to revise policy for LU4 land use 14.1 to allow development in the Union road area without requiring a specific plan to be prepared. Um in addition to that, the remaining comments ask that we revise policy natural resources 3.8 8 to replace a requirement for zero emissions operations to other measures that could be more directly controlled by the property order. Um revising policy land use 5.5. Um to um require regional distribution centers um it currently requires that regional distribution centers be located at least a thousand feet away from sensitive receptors. And this, by the way, is in keeping with recent state law. And the the request is to replace that with more with easily enforcable performance standards, but without a spatial separation. And then finally, to re reduce the themes of diversity, equity, and inclusion that are included in the draft general plan. Um, so that gives you a sense of the comments that were received in those seven letters. Again, you have five more before you this evening that you can look at on your own. I apologize that we just don't have time. if some I think the last two were received about an hour ago so we didn't have time to put them into this slideshow. Um this last slide is just to talk about your current schedule and the next steps. Um tonight you will be hearing public comment on the general plan and the climate action plan and then you'll be making a recommendation to the city council. Then you will have five more related items after this one. And then on April 20th, that entire package of six items will go to the city council and we hope to adoption at that council meeting. Um so in summary, I just want to um say again that it's it's been a pleasure to work on this project. I want to make sure again that the audience and you all and I know you are aware of this, but make

sure you're aware that this general plan is really very similar to draft number one that was originally created. We did our very best to reinccorporate all the ideas from draft number one into this new draft number three. Um, we believe we have fulfilled the city council's direction in that regard. And with that said, I'm available to answer any further questions you may have. And then you'll open it up, I think, for public comment. Any questions?

I have one final one. You kind of do it. You mentioned the addendum. It sounded like it was an administrative process. So, and you said the city council didn't have to adopt or uh neither do regular entrance. Um, so, so this is a change that's not going through the legislative process. It's bypassing the legislative process. I I wouldn't say it's bypassing it, but the the the law, state law, allows staff to make a finding that the conditions have not changed enough to require either a full new EIR, nor a supplement, nor a subsequent EIR. And those words can get confusing. They sound so similar, but they're actually two different things. So staff has made a finding that you don't need a whole new ER, you don't need a subsequent ER, you don't need a supplemental ER. All you need is essentially a very long memo to file that explains why you don't need those other things. And that's what's happened.

That's that's specific to climate action finance.

That's specific to the EIR, the environmental impact. So the and the environmental impact report covers both the climate action plan and the general plan and it actually covers most of the other actions that you'll be taking this evening. It it covers the housing element which is part of the general plan. It covers your zoning code which is subservient to the general plan. It covers the policies you'll look at because they're implementing the general plan and it covers the objective design standards which also implement the general plan. So that one EIR covers all of the actions you're taking tonight and it's an ER that all this is still going to get whether it's considered by the commission to adult it's going to have an impact for it if they just go through their bypass whether it's seen that way or not. I think another way to look at it is that your commission, I know most of you did not serve on it at the time, but this commission has already reviewed the impacts of this general plan in the environmental impact report that you recommended to be certified and that was ultimately certified at the end of 2024. So, your commission has already reviewed the impacts of this general plan. You're not doing it tonight, but you did. You collectively as a commission did it and the city council did it in 2024.

Well, I just have further question. Anything else?

I just had one comment. Um, just for the record, um, it's my understanding that the greenhouse gases, you know, this is what we're targeting. Um, market rate housing has a tremendous impact not only on the city but the county. And I don't think I think a simple jobs analysis or job of housing job analysis would show state that you know the more market rate housing that we're building probably increases the cost of assets because correct me if I'm wrong most market rate housing that is going to be built are to me which is I I would love to let you finish your question. I think I know where you're going and I can answer it now if you'd like. Yeah, I I what I'm saying is

I think you're on the right track, but I would like to see I guess what what this this comments more for the state and the regulator that you know every market rate housing is going to have a cumulative impact regardless the gases are are clean or whether or not they're electric that there's some serious structural changes that need to happen in Sacramento because we cannot keep growing the way we are. And and the point I think the sphere of influence. How we we'll get to that. How we've um uh shrunken sphere of influence is also going to have a um a positive impact. But either way, every market rate house that we build, it's going to add to the true house. And that that's kind of my point.

Yeah. And I I guess I I would agree with you and I'd just like to clarify a couple things. The first thing I say is that generally speaking, that exact analysis is what's covered in the climate action plan. So those exact ideas are the basis for some of the calculations that go into the climate action plan for all the reasons you said. And that said, there is a difference between market rate housing and the size and type of house. So, and both of those things have an impact. So, I think you're primarily speaking about um single family homes and particularly large lot single family homes which are more land intensive and that tend to um require people to make further trips because they're spread further apart. So, you can't for instance walk to a grocery store because you're living so far from the grocery store. And that's a function really of the lot size and the density more than the the market the the financial situation. When we talk about market rate units, we're talking about units that are priced the highest within the range of housing types. And there are single family homes that are for moderate income, lower income, and very low income people. There are also apartments and condominiums that are built for the higher income people where it's called market rate. So, it's important not to confuse those. It is also true that people with higher incomes tend to generate more greenhouse gases than people with lower incomes. And that's because people with with higher incomes have more choices. They go more places, they buy more things, so they do generate more greenhouse gases also. But so it's really both. It's both um providing lower income housing for people with lower means who do generate lower greenhouse gases per person. It's also providing um housing that's a little more dense and more centrally located like in this new general plan to allow people to make shorter vehicle trips and even to walk and take bikes for a lot of their trips and that can happen regardless of their income

whether they're higher income you living in a market rate unit or lower income. Those are choices they make by virtue of the type of housing and the density of housing they live.

Right. And I I just would like to finish off with 100% agree with everything you said, but I think it's advantageous for the city to to still do a analysis on their own that you know are these market these these these you know lower density or higher density more compact units are they attracting people from Hollister? Are they still attracting more commuters? Because if they're still attracting those communities then what you know the cumulative impact is still the cumulative impact. The idea is we want to get people off the road even even in the apartment people start new. That's just the part I wanted to emphasize. But thank you for it.

I have a couple of questions from the public comments that we received that were not if you can't answer now, let me know. But I just want to point them out. A couple things that were glaring were that there was somebody who mentioned that 100% of commercial projects could be approved but that they would have to be required to include residential units or housing. Is that accurate?

It is accurate that in all but one of the mixed use designations that the general plan requires both housing and commercial uses. So um there is the north gateway commercial which allows residential and does not require it. But the other mixeduse designation, the general mixeduse, the downtown mixeduse and the west gateway mixeduse, they do require the residential component. And the the policy reason for that is that housing is very important. Affordable housing is very important. Higher densities of housing are very important. And the development community here has had a revolution to build 100% commercial projects. And we're trying to really make mixeduse communities particularly in the downtown and the Westgate Bay area. So it is true that even though they're called mixeduse areas or precisely because they're called mixed juice areas, they would be required to have truly mixed suses and it wouldn't meet the spirit of those regulations if they ended up being 100% commotion. So um so I think that's something for us to discuss you know considering that we do I think here in the city of Hollister we do want to encourage business commercial we have a lot of housing probably too much for us to handle so requiring that is really um hard in my opinion and then another um can you also speak to so there was another public comment that came in and I want to say this so that for everyone everyone everyone's knowledge and it came from San Manito High School District Hollister School District or not Hollister Polar High School and so this was about the building of a second high school and providing support for I'll summarize it was a lengthy very well-written letter but I think the point to this is for our consideration as a city to think about the growth and

the need for schools whether it's a high school, elementary, and some of us served on, you know, school boards. And there is there has been an issue with the developments here not partnering with the city and the county to build schools. So if there's a way I don't know to speak to that to add that because I think that is a piece people we want people to come like to your point we want people to come and live here and those that are here but we're busting at the seams in our schools and so I think we need to be thoughtful in that way. I don't know. There's an

I I can just respond by saying that the letter does also say that the school district supports the general plan as written and it actually points out a series of policies that are included in the draft general plan that do exactly what you're saying. Um state law actually unfortunately has preempted cities from doing all they could imagine doing to support the schools. There are limits that the state has placed um that the development community asked for 20 30 40 years ago. those those limitations are still in place, but this general plan does as much as legally possible to support the school district when the city approves development and I think the school district's letter reflects that and congratulates you on on putting those policies into the plan

and they ask for for their support and then um the can you talk about explain so I would very new to the planning commission so I'm trying to understand the designation from high density residential to medium density residential. And because there's concerns from someone from the public about their parcels uh proposed to be designated high density under the draft poster general plan and they're looking at potentially recommending to revise it to medium. Can you speak to what what the difference between what how what would be the impact there? Well, I think that that in my mind, and Neil might want to add more, but I think the simplest way to think about it is that the high density designation will probably primarily be town houses and apartments. The medium density will be lower zero lot lines and small lot single family homes. Um and there are some property owners and developers in the community who prefer to build those um small the small lot single family the very dense single family homes the zero lot lines and they they are somewhat concerned about apartments and town houses. Um so because of that you have some of these comments coming in. I just want to let you know that what what the council directed us to do was to go back to the draft number one general plan and to not change land use designations um that were already in that draft number one and that's what we've done.

So this is at the request of our city council. Exactly. Yeah, all of the language designations um with the exception and and I can talk to it because I apologize it wasn't in the presentation but we did touch on in the staff report staff has made two corrections and one proposal to put airport support around our airport on all sides which was not in the January draft. Um but otherwise all the language designations are exactly as they were in the 2023 plan which was our directive from council to explain. So even if we were to contemplate talking about this this was already a directive from city

exactly madam chair if um the mixed use was only applicable for the mixed use. I'm not sure you probably did have this conversation about one with excuses. Um it's not going to be partial just that. I remember I just want to make sure you know we speak to people

and and I do want to say and you might want to add to this also with what we've talked about at the staffing consultant level is that we know that there are property owners who didn't particularly like what was in that. Number one, because of that council direction, we felt that it was more appropriate to get this done, get it adopted, and if an individual property owner would like to see a change, they can come in and ask for general plan amendment in the future, and it can be studied on its own merits rather than slowing down this process to look at what could be 10 or 15 or 20 individual requests and could add literally a year to this process. And I know the council really does not want that. So they could come back and request their own their own amendment.

And then one last if it's okay there was is it also true that if someone has an application already in process and it's there's an impact with this general plan that they will now have to either re I can speak to that. Um yes this so it depends on the status of the application depends on the type of application. So, as we've talked many a time, as we'll hear in the housing only, housing projects in particular have certain rights. Um, there's also vested times. Um, but from a incomplete application perspective, that's going to be your most potentially affected type of application. We have a handful and I will speak to them later as well. Um but incomplete applications at the time that the general plan becomes effective which will be 30 days after its adoption by the council um could potentially be affected depending on their status in order and have to comply with this general plan with the housing ordinances etc.

Thank you for explaining. Yeah, I I just had some further thoughts I think I would love to get addressed on this climate action plan because I know um you know we're talking about community emissions with ultimately uh increasing carbon emissions right technically speaking the biggest uh bottleneck is highway 25 coming into our community um and I know that the state of California just passed you know a few years back the BMT laws which ultimately has a whole measurement to to make it basically more expensive for any any infrastructure any basically project that has a negative environmental impact. So that increases and you could actually make the argument that EMT on top of whether climate laws will literally make it more expensive for anybody to live in a home um because of the cost the later cost of climate reduction you know ultimately requirements. So aside from that, but when it comes to 25 U that BMT literally shifted the cost of what was once considered $25 million projects 25 to now from what I'm hearing reading articles board of supervisors mention means closer to 80 million which takes us out of budget right so we really don't have all the money to be able to get that done grant still moving forward because there is money there regardless of that fact that's why I feel like these need to be more thorough conversations um because ultimately The very thing that's proposing to to reduce carbon emissions is actually increasing carbon emissions to us specifically I would argue negatively impacting rural communities that have to literally makes us the bane of the existence of California. If you live in rural America you're going to be punished for living there because you guys have ultimately if you live here you're going to be traveling to work right but 60% of our workforce certainly travels out of town um for their jobs so for their lives.

That's why I still open that same time supposed to have a positive impact but in reality you're actually having a very big impact or rule of America. I have a question about um all variables that go into the general plan these statistic designations the ratios that are sown in the table plan. How are those like how do you determine the 30 units which is the most infested item near property 30 units per mix

I can I can speak to that. Um yes. So the 30 units per acre as a minimum for our high density and for our mixed use came from a change that happened with the census. Um in when we first kicked off the general plan in 2020 the population. So the city of Hollister is a part by the federal census of the Santa Clara Sunnyale San Jose metropolitan area. um San Diego County and the city of Hollister, we are bumped into their metropolitan area as a census um data point. Um so we're not considered a rural county, we're not considered a rural jurisdiction, were actually a part of that metropolitan area, which into California law when you're calculating the minimum density requirements for your housing element, um because we're in a metropolitan area, it has a different calculation and the minimum is either 20 or 30. And the way that that distinction is divided is based on the metropolitan area population. And right now that population is hovering about 30,000 below 2 million. But 2 million is the trigger point. And when we kicked off the general plan and started doing the data analysis and running the numbers and then also started getting our arena draft numbers from COG and the state um in order to meet our housing, we were over 2 million in Santa Clara County. Uh the 2020 census data did drop us below 2 million when it came out in the end of 2022. So technically the minimum right now is 20 but every year the American community survey data which is an annual census survey we have been getting closer and closer to that 2 million point and as soon as we tip over that the minimum goes back up again to 30 and so it was staff's recommendation to the council um originally when this

was happening to change our high densities to accommodate that 30 minimum so that we would not have to reddraft our housing element if the census date of January would not have really dropped our general plan. Um, and we do still have medium density and low density as an option for that middle and lower density housing. But where we're seeing a lot of the contestant is that most of our vacant available parcels in town are redeveloping parcels in town to have that mix designation currently or have that density designation currently. And so there's not a lot of mix and density land available in citys right now. So it is a change to the existing use as a concept but it's not we can't lower the density we can't down zone because housing all concerns we would have to if we down zone all our mixed use that's current or all of our high density that's current to medium we would have to find somewhere else to upzone um so I think what we would see potentially in the future would be looking at medium density in HA perhaps in the road They're looking at medium or a mix of medium and low and high mixed use. But inside the city, there's not a lot of changes to the designation that's downtown is downtown. We're upping the minimum from 25 to 30 to make sure we're meeting that housing requirement and nothing for that housing problem in the middle of our citiz. Um so the numbers that were given they're based on a metropolitan area not just

right. Yes. So we're we're captured in a metropolitan area and then state law says if you're in a metropolitan area that has over 2 million population the minimum is 30. And is there a reason why mixed projects have the same minimum requirement as those but are not mixed just high density?

Uh yes. So high density residential is we are proposing to we're kind of expanding the medium and high density residential because what we found with the current medium density zoning is only 8 to 12 units an acre which is very narrow and doesn't accommodate a lot of projects. They're they're not really you're not seeing the diverse type of zoning. We're seeing a lot of single family homes in our medium density residential. A lot of the developments we see now um new homes the small homes those are actually zoned medium currently still out of subdivision across the street from the school on Buista road they're all medium density so that's the type of development you're seeing with the current 8 to 12 it's very narrow so this general plan is proposing to broaden uh 11 pins anacre to 29 which is going to see some of that smaller single family product on the low end, but also you could see more town home, a little bit higher, maybe some low low scale apartments in medium, which is more of what you'd think when you think of medium type of housing and then high density at that 30 unit of apartments is what is intended when you label something. I think I'm seeing here for example high density residential um as uh 30 to 65 is around 12 unit but then for example the west gateway commercial has the same number like minimum unit 30 but they also have this commercial component so

like I'm just thinking like they have an additional factory which is a commercial use is it expected for it to be able floors

yes so it's not it's not a mandate or vertical mixed uses which is where you see it ground floor like residential above that's certainly allowed. It also could potentially be a project where you have a what we call horizontal mixed use which is where it be a separate commercial with some apartments on the other side. So both of those could be accommodated in the mixed use density designation. Um the densities are coming from again minimum to make sure that they're okay to look at for housing sites um as we go through the the whole cycle and the whole life of this general plan. the goal was to make it live as long as possible for the city. Um but it's so it could be vertical or um horizontal mixed use in those mixed use designations. But one of the goals of the general plan as well, you study a new economic development. Um,

no, I'm just seeing a little

and so it was to to try to require commercial and not have to take away our mixed use designations that were created in 2005 because of meeting housing, not having to change the zoning of all our mixed use sites to a 100% housing site to make sure that we could still get that mixed use get those commercial opportunities for the city. Um that was a that was a strong goal of where we're coming with the land use policies, the housing only policies was try to preserve as much commercial opportunity in those mixed use areas and try to get that true mixed use. Otherwise, we would have probably had to change a lot of those to residential state. Yeah, I just see that might be like a little bit difficult to meet both direct housing but then the commercial mixeduse you have the same number of housing requirements but you still have to plan for your circulation for your commercial property as well. So there's not always a long time but um that's the one that I think like what would happen those are there's variance expanded there's other public instead of getting the 30 mill number like I say like restorative and so forth so I'm just wondering like are there other staff if they want to do Marshall next week or whatever would be beneficial to the city,

right? Yeah. Do you all want me to open for comment or do you want

one quick final point for consideration when the census happened? I actually sat on the joint supervisor and we really went to uh Gonzalez and had a press conference press for supervisors in Monterey County and we ultimately made the argument with it. The fact that they actually took us away from Monterey County which was actually where we first were established with segment as ultimately Santa Clara County. We saw the writing on the wall there ultimately that these main departments are actually going to create urban designations for urban requirements and urbanizing rural America. This makes no sense to me. Uh but regardless of that fact that that's why I think the density requirements although they sound good hypothetically, right? And it's no disrespect to final staff. It's their their expertise. Regardless of that, it still doesn't play out I would argue necessarily practically speaking. And I'm pretty sure you'll hear it comes from from so many attendees that uh uh especially when you have a bottle of fire because financially I don't see how anybody could be wanting to fill these high dos you have folks that really can get to work. Uh and if you're going to buy these right you're going to have you're making a lot more money. You want a single market u but you know if you're if you're making it's going to be very hard for you to buy one that I don't want but it makes no sense. I mean just like we have to consider that reality because economic development is a part of the federal if I may we still have the six cycle we'll have basically I think we'll be able to make comments now about housing amenities in other

I think that's what I wanted to get at um let's yeah not speed it up but but basically I think it's more appropriate to speed it not speak.

Okay. Thank you. Uh thank you for the presentation and let's go ahead and open public hearing at 7:02. And staff, do we have any public comments on this item? Uh before we go to the speaker cards, I just will note for the record and it's been mentioned we have received five written public comments on item 6.1. These are made available in the lobby and will be appended to the online agenda as well with the written promise we receive from Christopher Vito Santo High School District Victor Gomez Indian and Alexa for the same Thanks. We have um Chris Briantino in person. How many do we have? So to determine 30 minutes or

3 minutes.

I'm Chris Pantino and I'm a property owner within the Union Road special planning area. I'm concerned that the U draft general plan effectively prohibits development in this area for an indefinite period of time. Policy LE141 states that a specific plan must be created prior to approval of any new development projects in the area as written. This language conditions all developmentals on subation of future planning document. The general plan update process began in two in 2020. Property owners have already waited more than six years for adoption of this plan. Requiring an additional undefined waiting period before any application may even be considered is unreasonable. Critically, the draft provides no timeline, no initiation trigger, no responsible agency, no funding source, and no completion scheme. Without these elements, the requirement functions as a de facto moratoring on development in this area. Indefinite deferral of development rights increases investments of finances, reduces property values, discourages job generating generating uses, undermines orderly marketdriven growth, and places a disappropriated burden on a small group of land owners. A general plan is intended to provide certainty and implementable land use direction. It should not postpone all activity pending future studies with no defined schedule or accountability. If additional guidance is desired, the city can address design and infrastructure standards through zoning regulation, development agreements, or project level reviewing

completion of a separate specific plan before any application. This process is necessary and counterproductive. I respectfully request request that the city revise policy LU141 to allow development consistent with adopted general PAM designations to proceed immediately. This is a suggested language. Development within the Union Road special planning area may proceed consistent with adopting adopted general plan land use designations and zoning. Preparation of a specific plan shall not pre preclude or delay consideration or approval of individual development application. This approach preserves city oversight while restoring predictability, fairness, and ability for property owners to respectfully invest in their land. Oh, perfect. So, this letter was um written by Michael Frigantino and sent to you. I'm not sure if you guys have it, but if you'd like, I have a copy for you. Would you like it?

Thank you. And can I just make one of the comments? Um the gentleman here, he made a comment that if you pass this that a landowner could uh um come in and make an attempt to make an addend addendum to me. I'd like him to let let us know how much that's going to cost it's and how how much time that would cost probably. I think it would be not applicable. Thank you. Thank you. Do we have any?

Yes, we have we have several. Um I'm going to go to online with Chris Chris um can you hear me?

Yes. Hi, my name is Chris Pito 1011 Commamino Delmare San Diego and I attended the planning commission meeting on February 26, 2026 and was involved in a discussion on item 7.1 and our discussion during that study session is relevant to the items that I'll speak on tonight. I submitted a letter to the city of Hollister included the clerk earlier this week and I'm requesting the planning commission choose option two in the list of options and make an amendment in your recommendation to the city council and not accept the language as presented. I would ask that you please direct staff to make all required changes so APN05209045 is general commercial and all necessary locations within the pertinent documents. The west gateway requirements for housing density design etc should not apply to APN05209045 and staff should be directed so that the current planning applications if amend even if amended will not be required to comply with the west gateway changes. Additionally, as part of the place works presentation tonight, they showed an updated land use map slide showing the current housing density on the project to 20 to 25 units that would increase to 30 to 65 that requires 75 units on a 2 and 1 halfacre project and that's not feasible. Staff further said that didn't have to be vertical, but before you tonight was also an item LU8.8 that required three-story buildings adjacent to the street and LU8.1 requires commercial use on a ground floor. staff further said stated that if the zoning was not changed, we could go through a general plan amendment, which is true, except there's currently a ban on general plan amendments. Then when general planments are allowed, there's only four allowed per year. This is a very simple request that would save over $60,000 of having to do a general plan amendment. As the gentleman before me just stated, I think that you've been given some false information tonight. We have a real project that in July her the

city manager at the time was allowed to be commercial only. Then through a series of items in code references, zone changes, we've now been required to add residential to the project. I disagree with the density requirement and have put the city on notice as such. But the simplest and cleanest way to resolve this is to make this a commercial project. The idea of this general plan is to look at hope and theory and what could happen. And what I have is a project with tenants who are financially committed to a development in the town that's going to create job opportunities, economic development, and amenities. And we can't even get an application in. And the reason the council didn't ask for changes is because I can't submit an application and get it to a hearing. So what I'm asking for is the opportunity to do that. There are other items that are in here that will make our life difficult if it's not zoned commercial and if we don't remove the requirements in this west gateway like the three-story obligation. It is not feasible. General commercial allows residential but it doesn't allow commercial and residential or even mixed use. I appreciate your time. I'll speak further on some of the items later. Thank you very much. Our next um speaker is here. Uh thank you.

Good evening, planning commission service and all. I I emailed the following information to new commissioners uh actually yesterday and I think Eva has supplied you with paper copies today in case there was some difficulty with the emails. Um my family owns the vacant land in Hollister on San Felipe between Maple and Santana bordered on three sides by Starbucks, McDonald's, and the GFB. um lots of money right now. Um the proposed general plan 2040 zoning for this land is mixed use as demonstrated by the following information. The required demand density of 30 dwelling units per acre does not work for in 2022 and early 2023. Republic own properties working with the city uh uh spent 18 months designing uh a mixed used infill infill development for our land uh including including live in commercial which would keep residents in Hollister. Unfortunately, they were forced to abandon spell after the April 2023 GP 2040 draft changed our zoning from 20 billion the acre to 30 billion years the acre. Their appeals of the city were ignored and they walked away uh from $350,000 in deployments. John Schultz, vice president of CDRE, represents our property. He has presented it to dozens of developers and none have been willing to work with 30 dwelling units per acre. They all state that a 30 that at 30 billion units per

acre unit construction costs are much higher and that there is no market in Hollister for that housing d housing density. In June 2023, Dennis Martin of the Bay Area Building Industry Association reported that densities about 20 billion units per acre would not work in Hollister. To be clear, we did not solicit that opinion. Victor Victor Gomez, the former former mayor of Hollister, also feels that 30 drilling units per acre will not work instead. I welcome to questions, comments, and suggestions. Thank you for attention to this matter. Thank you. Also in person we have Carson.

Good evening commissioner. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. Carson with K2 solutions and I live in area 7. I am a registered lobbyist with the city of also. Um I'm here on behalf of Mr. Tim Johnson. Mr. Johnson owns a property that's roughly three acres at the southeast corner of better road. He has an interesting property because 20 30 years ago the county came to him asked him to sell part of his property to provide space for a sewer station to accommodate a sewer line that goes directly down Southside Road. Um so that low-inccome housing could be built to the south of him. um he could he agreed to do that and then the units went in later on. I believe that the sewer system was set up with the migrant housing uh complex out there as well and units that are being built maybe two years ago that use the same system. Um in addition to that, there's two subdivisions that were built in the county using the same line and pump sewer directly onto the station that it is on his old east property there. And it's kind of a unique situation because when you combine your land use map with your policy decision, proposed polic policy decision to not provide out of jurisdiction sewer service. Um you've essentially created an island for Mr. Thron's property where it cannot develop to the like density of the properties to the south of him that his property was used to accommodate to the east of him that have been approved in the county. They're on uh Sar District Service and the future development to the directly to the north across the street will be a retro property um which is going to be mixed use and if built at the density proposed it would be multi-story and probably a thousand units. Um, so he'll have three acres there that he cannot

develop in the city or in the county at the same densities because your proposed policy will not allow him to get sewer access to a sewer lines directly in the street in front of his property. And he is not in a position to be included in your sphere. Um, even though in the previous draft he was included. Um, if we were to look at the map, and it might be easier later on if anyone's interested to pull it up, I can show you that really only about seven or eight acres in this area was left out of the sphere after the line is moved back up to Enterprise Road. In the first version, he wasn't included. In the second version, he was because the commission at the time and the council thought that it didn't make sense to um essentially have a taking of somebody's value of their property in this way. Um, so if anybody's interested, I'd like to have that conversation and kind of show you why it doesn't make sense. You'll have to really use kind of like a Google Earth view to see what's already built and then use your proposed land use map to show what could. Um, thank you so much and appreciate you listening.

Our next speaker is Mary Lia. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. They probably are cold. So, hope you can hear me. Um, I was looking at the u page 23 of the the new general plan um land use map and um it seems to me that it could be done better. What's was really hard in fact my friends are looking at this right near these boundaries the city limit boundaries you can see it symbolized again in the legend the existing sphere of influence and the proposed sphere of influence are really hard to read because the boundary lines are the overlay on top of each other so you can't always tell where it is so I would suggest that um creatings of the the maps. You know, you can still have that, but then break it out and and show what where each of those lines really are because you can't tell. I mean, you know, three lines on top of each other, you can't tell. Like, for example, the the proposed sphere of influence. It's a dash line. You can't tell where it is in many places because it's over another line which is I think spirit in place. And um so I would say that you guys are having difficulty enforcing all this because my two friends were like and they also couldn't tell because you can't see the city streets. It's just you know if you look at that map on page 20 and they looked at it quite a bit. They couldn't tell exactly if they were going to be impacted. So I would suggest it's probably not difficult just print

another couple of maps that break you can have this combined one but break it up so people know you know how they're impacted I suggested that they comment but they said they were too shy to talk so that's why I came here to help help them out they would like to know if their property is inside of the posterior influencer office my friend said thank you

thank Our next speaker is Mr. Go to Russia on that as of Monday or Tuesday. I was in a meeting that had things changing from the rural county for us where we're going to be a different polic. So it's going to give us a lot of money back funds available. That's why I should know that with house eat. Okay. Um I'm in the north gate where he brought and I've met with Eve a couple times. Um I bought a piece of property with the intentions that when I bought it, I did the research on it. I could put employee housing on. I checked with the city, checked with everybody. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Bought it. About a year and a half later, I go to the city. I want to build employee houses. They say, "We'll get back to you. I want to have that meeting." We have to have people in their room. Get back to me. No, we can't do that because it's uh only if you have any storage. Now, you guys are going to give the North Kate way where I am. But at 30 units per acre, figure it out. There's 43,560 ft an acre. If you did a a thousand thousand square foot house, that's 30 of them level. You can't fit it in. There's impossible. I don't want to put employee housing in like that. I This is a brand new one. I think you guys should be able to drop that to 20 at least, even 15. Put something decent. Um, where is the small town rural character that the slide said up on the road? I hope every one of you went and matched the map up

with what's on the property and what's in the neighborhood. And I doubt if you did drive around and look at that, but you should. You're going to see some prime ad that zone for high density. You're going to see infill like on Union Road project that should be done. I submitted a plan for that with the commercial and housing. I don't want to build housing. I'm not a developer. I'm a damn farmer. But the community has forced me. That's infill to me. But what they do, they kicked it out. They kept my money. They didn't even bother looking at my map. That's not right. I would have made a lot of written comments. And he knows this. Uh but I thought you were going to carry forward the comments from the previous one and two, but I guess they didn't. Um, and one thing that's happened there things happen now. BMT is going to change. AD ADUs were not an issue back in 2021. Now we have them everywhere and even some places you can put 200 cross. So there's some issues that are going on that have happened even in the time that this thing's been changing. So things have changed out there and I don't know if we are doing the right thing or not sometimes but something needs to be done. Highway 25 is your economic stream and it's not going to create any jobs. And I've been working with that to try to create jobs and bring that I'm with a group of farmers. We're trying to preserve the farm ground out there, but we're trying to get the highway to come in in such an angle to get economic development to the county without affecting the roads. And we're all in favor of fixing the highway, but maybe it's not the right place to bring that much more traffic in. And thank you. We have Sunonny Flores also want to

speak. Good afternoon Sunny 8 157 Street. Um I have a question. Uh does this general plan about 8,36 homes? Is that number? No one mentioned the total number. I can't respond to the comment, but I also don't have that number. Okay, if I read the right document, it's allowing for 8,364 months. The state requirements is 4,134. So, it's double. It's 100% buffer. If I'm accurate, the state doesn't require that. They recommend 20 30%. So if this does get through 50, 364 ohms, that's opposite of what the council said they want, right? And if that is accurate with 7614 more than the original point. So if this gets approved that way, grab. Additionally, 30 units uh for high density left. uh Sano County is part of the metro area but it is considered suburban by so it should save money um we're trying to keep our field but that's about it I don't think I mean I am a local developer and I can look very young building parking lot that's not thank I do not have any comment cards or anything.

Thank you. We will go ahead and close the public hearing at 7:25. And now is there further discussion from the commission on this? Do you do you have any

um first I want to I understand well actually I don't understand I'm a land owner but I know that this can be a very tumultuous uh process and you know inevitably this did start in 2020 and the former city council decided they wanted to expand new city council got elected says that we don't want to expand sphere of influence. This is an economic document. It's a plan, but it's an economic document. We do not want to expand the sphere of influence because it opens the gate or opens the door. Now, we're bringing it back to where it should have been. I understand that. It's frustrating because I think some people were kind of promised one thing and it's kind of taken back. That was not the intention. The intention was to control the urban sprawl. The sprawl that that that we all we all want to preserve. I think farmland. That is why we are bringing this here back. Um I just wanted to highlight that because I think some people are missing some context. Um and then I I'll have more to say but I'm going to have a question. Um how many other jurisdictions have updated their planning including you know like the rural area basically the 30 um permission I I I would like I mean I know this is sounds like this is fairly new um I mean not the plan but ultimately the the now optimization of of this requirement and I'm curious what has been kind of the effects of it. I I just ballpark. I mean, I'm almost

not a developer and I'm not a farmer either, but just based off of my understanding, it didn't seem like they chill, especially in the rural community just um so I'm just question. Yeah,

I can try and look into it. Um, I think I'm not sure if I'd be able to locate another rural jurisdiction like ours that's also designated as a metropol in a metropolitan area that work. Well, I ultimately too because um you know we we we're now going to have to be tested with the consequences of it and I want to understand you know ultimately what how does this not actually have a negative impact costwise for our little things um and what does that mean for small right I mean technically we're not strong right the meter kind of and it also was a city of the the last influence there's this higher so you're really almost forcing this you know moving upwards kind of scenario I was just going to raise my hand and say all over the place

I have more comments which okay but also I was curious about the same can you clarify if we're because I have some question concerns. If we do we have to approve, not approve, do an action on this, but then what if the others intact?

Yes. So, we do have to take action on this item, but the general plan, all of the other items, including the housing element, build off of this general plan. So, I think and I'd be happy to ask you like hear your questions and and answer them to the best of my ability. If I think it's something that really is like a housing policy question that isn't necessarily impacted, I can let you know. But I think that especially if these these types of things are perfectly valid suspensions for the general plan, the housing is built off of this general plan existed as the vote. Okay. So I mean for consideration I'm I think the themes here right preserving farmland heard some people talking about this requirement of commercial and forced to build residential which I think is goes to the conversation we're saying. So then someone with a commercial area now you have to have residential and we already can't deal with the growth that we have. I I just I don't I don't think that that's good. um listening to the land owners, our local business owners, right? And the applications, this also when we had our joint city um city council and planning commission meeting, this was the theme that came up about applications and changing the rules of the game and waiting and we heard fees and somebody mentioned fees. What's it going to cost to have an amendment? So, I think all those questions are still unanswered. Um, and to the person who talked about the maps, thank you for saying that cuz I thought the same and that um I was, you know, feeling like your your neighbors like should I ask cuz I don't see street names and I'm not

sure, you know. So, thank you for saying that. I felt the same and I it's a valid question, right? What where what streets are those? So, um so I think that would be something that I would want to see. Um and then to the speaker landowner who was talking about employee housing. Wow. Something we need and it wasn't possible. So what are we you know I just feel like what are we doing? How are we not helping each other who have land who want to do good for our community and instead of these you know um high density units? I don't I don't think that's the only part.

Yeah. I mean, my my understanding is especially with these climate action plans and um the state requirements, they're intentionally broad, so they don't necessarily have uh you know, it's like they're they're they're guideline driven, so they don't actually give specificity to the application. Granted, for obvious reasons, it's too hard, right? Because every community is so different the way it's actually going to work itself out. Personally, I feel like there's too many questions and and I mean I I definitely have a question with how how is it that we can even have a requirement for someone to build something outside of what their interests are, right? They're they're if they're they're ultimately an investor, right? A business owner and if they're going to invest, why would they say, "Okay, I'll build what you want me to

when ultimately that's not their their ultimate idea, right? That's not the intention of of of so you might take them out of house, right? it might take a lot of even visibility and I know for me when I on the board of supervisors we couldn't require a school I mean a developer um to build a school right there's requirements on the commercial and I'm trying to understand how this doesn't have violation you know there's not some sort of a violation by forcing someone to build houses right I get it the state of California is obviously very clear they want they want more houses uh everybody but that doesn't necessarily play So I think there's too many questions personally and I would argue I I can't support this. I would rather table this for a further discussion about

building and yeah and to add to your point about the business owner I think that it was in a public comment there's someone who wants to build a McDonald right and then it's like oh but you have to build a residential what I don't understand but that's not what they want to do so how do we keep attracting business we're not going to so anyways Okay. Anything else? Do they then want to other comments or do you want to make more? I just want to make an emphasis that or let me ask that if this doesn't get approved by us, city council could still approve. Correct.

That's correct. So, tonight we're looking for the recommendation of the council or of the commission and we'll take forward your recommendation.

How much time will I delay it? If we don't if we don't. If you would like to make a recommendation that the council deny it, that would be it's not my recommendation to you as staff, but if that is what you would like to recommend to the council, you can do that. It will still be going forward way your recommendation. So I I just want to emphasize that we have state mandates. When I say state mandates that, in other words, we have to approve this housing element or else we start to lose local control. That that was the whole that was the whole thing. I think there's a mixup between mixed use and commercial. There's commercial and there's mixed use. Mixed use. You have to do both. For commercial, you can just do commercial. I just want to emphasize that I don't think we should be getting held up on what makes you commissioner. To be fair, we've already we're already losing local. Technically speaking, state law forces us to do something outside of the the local community's intentions, but the general plan, which my understanding is the authority of the local community, ultimately the governing body of that community with the constituents and considerations. So, we're we're literally violating their will if by implementing something that is not even tenable. And here's the reality is because it's so high level, the implications of it being we deal with the collateral damage of any kind of takings, anything that violates individual property rights um and ultimately forces the upon out of their ability to fund it. U there's all these negative consequences and we're going to deal with it, not the state problem,

right? I understand that. But we've had a discussion about the mixed use. We all agreed that these areas should be mixed that we want to keep the spirit otherwise we get the problem that we had on what was it was the dollar general remember the whole was like there was these the apartment complex then there was a dollar general that is not the spirit of mixed use the spirit was kind of this bohemian kind of living downtown that was the spirit we all agreed on that and then now it seems like we're kind of like we're changing I get it there's some property owners too upset. They feel like we changed. But but we we have to be consistent on on what we've we gave staff direction. They came back and kind of flipped Nick's body.

My understanding was okay. So actually was with him the their willingness to do it right and this is about this is the opposite, right? Because this is also broad. It doesn't just apply to it if requires it. It's it's not every topic. It's correct me if I'm wrong. It's just mixed us up. Whatever is being developed is mixed use. Correct. That's correct. So within the city.

Yeah. Yes. So so the general plan has policies surrounding the requirement for commercial on mixed use properties and then recently um in October which came before the council by the commission in September of last year the council adopted an ordinance which requires both um commercial and residential to preserve that spirit of mixed use. that it is applicable to all of our mixed use designations. So, under this general plan, it is the downtown mixed use, West Gateway mixed use, mixed use, which translates into our neighborhood mixed use um zoning designation currently. Those are our three current mixed use designations. under this general plan. Um there's also the North Gateway, although uh staff and and that's in the um staff reported later tonight with the zoning ordinance. But for North Gateway, though the council gave us directive that we could propose residential because we were looking for sites for our housing element, we did not have enough sites in currently as the agency had um to allow mixed use in North Gateway, but they were quite hesitant and wanted to preserve commercial. So staff is proposing to that's kind of new. It never was intended with the same spirit of mixed use and so that's going to allow mixed use residential and commercial but there are four mixed use designations in general and that is what would require in only those location

right no for mixed uses in every commercial partial

we have general commercial as well office that are 100% commercial where 100% commercial projects are required and then we also have all of our residential designations where 100% residential is required that makes sense is where if you're counting something I just don't it's just this this is not like um there's a cost to it right so by designated we might just completely kill an opportunity for that even that property to be used um at all so I personally believe as in with other things there should be an amendment process to allow economic development to be a priority. Um, and you don't know, right? You might you might by by the scope of a hand all these opportunities because they're going to say, "Well, I can't do it." And that's that's I think this is but this is that would be more appropriate discussion for the humanities portion, not the um

no what is where do we go? We're on 6.1. No, no. 6.1 general plan climate action. We're on the climate action, correct? No, no. 6.1 is both the general plan and the final action plan. So, we are discussing both. Okay. Do we have a motion on this item? I'll make a motion to accept the general plan um as staff recommendation. I make your opposing motion. We have to hear the first.

So you can have a second motion and the way that they'll be heard is the second motion. If it's a second, we'll go first. So I think I think

Yeah. So I think you would need a second on a motion on the floor and then you could also make another motion and if it's a second. Okay. Do we have a second? So, and this would justify this would be a second on Commissioner Rodriguez's motion. Thank you. First, I believe. So I I I just

table action 6.1 I'd like to talk to the occupants after honestly I think it's a better idea so we better understand we have a Maybe some more clarity on exactly let's proceed with the conversation but not say yesterday can give static stat I want to better understand because one there's not enough clarity on the requirement for commercial project in the mix areas and I'll have to enforce that force literally to have the middle right or mix of the defense liability of that I mean there's all these other impacts right that we just mentioned but um I want to better understand I mean how is it even going to impact that those properties are there already you know people own those properties Mhm.

What is it going to happen? I mean the the fact that you're requiring it when we don't even know what the market's going to have to demand. Um and it's just an assumption, you know. So this is just a designation that doesn't necessarily have any credit but we're going to be required if no more. So um really quickly just I've been asked to provide some clarification once again about how that item will still proceed to to the same occurren with your recommendation of whatever you come forward right regardless. Yes.

Yeah. I think we understand that. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate that. So, even if we say, for example, we're going to table this, it's still going to go to city council as scheduled. They can decide either whatever they decide exactly, but we want to be very clear to our articulate what your motion is. Okay. That be to the end of theession plan. be assigned. Yeah. Oh, that's a good table to the end of the discussion and that's a good sign because then Yeah.

Or could that be the most and and I could add potentially as well if that what we could be doing is forwarding this with the concerns about the mixed use required. That could be a motion as well. That's what you wanted to do and let the council know that you're recommending revisions to that section or recommend being changed or recommending a denial because of that concern whatever that might be that could also be so approval with revisions to agency or or considering that

I respect that. Um and I appreciate Dr. Kelly mentioning that regarding this the questions I think need to be we one what are the the potential issues or concerns right of this designation and two really at because there's not I think clarity on our end there we're not confident it should go to as a legislator to city council or legislators we're advisory right so we're not necessarily we have a policy so all we're doing is saying we suit you with confusion and see potential negative parts that decide that the legislator us.

So, do we have a motion on the floor that you want to is there another one u with potential uh concerns about issues. We move that we we uh city council consider this item for adoption. Consider doing ahead. I would I would consider session that would be nice for recommendations to have the next item. Yeah. So, right. So, to your motion motion to table. Is there a second?

I'll second. Okay. All in favor? I oppose abstain. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you for your patience everyone. Uh we're not taking it lightly. So 6.2 six cycle housing element adoption Mary. May we have the staff report? Okay. Good evening. We'll move on to the second item which is uh review of the city's uh current draft of the success. We have Brian report from our consulting brand, Miss Kelly and we may also have David. We do good evening. Uh my name is Brian Del with Associates the city's um housing consultant. So we get this uh yeah we'll kick this off in uh 2023. So it's also a long process similar to the general plan.

Yeah. So I'll go into kind of where we're at with the housing element, what the housing is, um and go into what what the implications are for the city. Um so the housing element is of one section, one element of the general plan, previous item. Um it's the only section of the general plan that has to be updated on regular quick schedule. So it's every eight years. Um and it's also the only section that needs to be reviewed and certified by um comply with with state housing law. Um the reason for the update was really to stay up to date housing law and training feels like weekly. Um but really it's to set goals, policies and programs to address the housing need um of the city. Uh housing elements they're updated and to ensure that we're we're safe. Um and we need to demonstrate that we can sufficiently address uh the housing need capacity within the city. Um the uh a huge part of the process is also some uh workshops um there surveys um and public uh what it means to be certified from HCB so that uh the state department housing community development including this document against all statutes um and they are ultimately the ones that are going to determine is it sufficient um to sufficiently address uh state law. Um the benefits certification is it allows the city to be eligible for grants um or funding um all various types of funding. Most funding sources require either an adopted housing element or certified housing element. Um so you can choose really that one but also infrastructure as part of that. Um having a certified housing also also closes you to really a lot of the penalties here. Um the biggest penalty

or the biggest tons of fun is not having a certified housing on it. Um is really the lack of access to state funding. So don't have their certified housing eligible for for a lot of these funding sources. Again, CBG is that huge one. Um it's a huge funding source for the city for for many cities across the state. Um but also infrastructure funding. Um but there's a variety of funding sources that ineligible. Uh the second is uh not highly certified housing. So there was legal actions. So this is from private party um which in general um we need to open to to a lot of that. Um and these can result in monarch fines um suspension of control um or certain projects going directly to HCB or uh the most concerning uh consequence is the loss of local control. So under builder friendly uh certain qualif projects can um you know essentially not comply with open zoning no general plan um there's certain uh requirements that follow but generally speaking they don't have to comply with the existing zone or assistations um I think the big takeaway from this is that the housing element doesn't approve projects um it doesn't guarantee any development but failing to do so does ensure that way. So, uh the housing element is kind of broken down into six or features here. I'm not going to go through all of these. I'm going to go through them in a second. Um but generally this is how every section is organized or every section kind of like stop and see. Uh so I'm going to refer to regional housing needs allocation at Vena. Uh but really what is it's the uh regional housing needs allocation and this is the statewide determination. system comes

out from states from HD uh determines what the statewide housing loop is. Um what these uh totals uh do is they initiate the housing element process. So um it quantifies them unique for statewide uh also breaks it down in category for every juris uh for um the entire suite um and these projections it's methodology which has to publish it u generally speaking it comes from uh projections future growth in population is a bit real like big uh so again it comes from HB assigns uh regional allocations So this goes to council of governance. So here it goes to the central council of government um and uh as we call establish their own for city's land. Um so that determination uh that process concerning that the city is going to be allocated, units. Um and again this is not a way to build uh these housing units is to have plan capacity. I was so fascinated to be able to 400 4,000. Um this is kind of big picture of of how these units are broken down by income category. So you'll see there's five income categories from extremely low income all the way uh to above moderate income which is almost uh what we would consider above moderate uh what we positive although some range in moderate considered um the breakdown on far right side you'll see um or the breakdown for each category um the second column there you'll see that's the range of incomes um there And that would range all show

what that range looks like for the area become area. Um and for that income category uh area medal income u ranges up to 2025 limits um and for the medium income it's 140,200 for so that's just to show but I think a big thing to note here is that approximately 40% household within 30 falls um so that kind of shows what percent 40% 39 something.

Are those the folks that live here and work here?

Correct. Yeah, that's just for city. Uh so we'll see that there's a significant jump uh in allocation cycle. Uh it's over three times uh it's almost three times as much as the last cycle. Uh this is not you know unique to Hollister just across the state from countries. uh for example um spark near suicide cruise times their their uh allocation. So it was really uh this increase is driven by the methodology by which used to really um identify the capacity that wasn't built in past cycles. They kind of build that into this so that city aspirational to develop that housing post. Uh so again this project is adopted in April 2023. Um we kicked off with a series of workshops uh study sessions uh from April 2023 to January 2024. Um it was just a series of drafts administrative drafts outreach u that kind of shape the plan u to to what you need to develop into. Uh but the first draft was public review draft was published in January 2024. Um there was uh 60 review period. Um city received comments. The draft was updated based off those comments from this body and city council in March 2024 the first submitt. So that was in March 2024. Uh from then until February of this year submitt. So there's three submitts uh a couple of internal submitts. kind of supplements to that original submitt to address kind of some some comments that issue have uh within that period. Uh but

in February, so last last month, uh February 13, the city received the status letter. The bad services is that the city complies with our statutes uh but cannot be certified until u which is uh similarly to uh the kick off uh process was the weekend also kicked off in April 2023 there's been two workshops uh there's been there's new survey that was available for seven eight months Uh that was an online forum. Uh then there's also um social media post on the city's website available. There's two joint study sessions. So that was the plan commission and city council just what everyone would discuss similar to this um without having to wait for the other body to recommendation so um and yeah so now we we have the public period first one is uh 30 uh six sorry um and every one is second uh during every one of those there is a notification at the s while we're on the community engagement part um do want to note that there was a request I believe in the first item um the owner of this property just uh brought this issue up but um there's a request to remove one of the sites wrong for tree west area um and the removal of the site will not create an issue with the buffer um the city intentionally creates or or establishes a buffer uh for situations like this site may not work out or um it can be removed for one reason or another. Um so the the removal of the

site doesn't cause the city to go under it it's it obligation for the category. Um then we will decide if that's policy decision or city deal. Uh the housing element we have is two chapters. Uh just the intro generous housing element is uh but then the little tweak of the plan is what is chapter two which the housing plan is going into a little bit detail here in a bit. Um but the rest of the sections are embassy set. uh earners further housing which is an optical I keep uh saying AFH so I don't have to think tongue twisters um this is a relatively not a new concept but a new state requirement um in this cycle so what AFH really what it means for the city for all cities all jurisdions in California um it means that um through the housing a we address you know any disparities in housing needs um and access opportunities so this means if um you you know, break any concentration or segregation. You don't want all housing in one area. You don't want all um market housing in one area of the city. Really want to that really makes for uh and the city through this plan uh addresses and affirmative approach for housing through it policies of the policy plan. This is where we establish the policy, programs, and uh objectives to meet the housing needs. Um so there's five overarching goals within the the housing element. Um and each one of those programs um actions fall into addressing one of these goals. Uh the policy plan takes into into consideration the feedback that was received throughout the whole process um of feedback from uh planning commission and city council. Um and also complies

with all or is meant to comply with all the state federal laws. Um so a lot of the actions you'll see of the housing element uh are just actions to up toate say zoning code to get up to date with state. So it may not currently be in the zone code may not currently be in uh compliance with safe but you know the the actions uh the goals uh and the policies within the policy plan address their housing uh goals housing opportunity for income categories uh affordable housing access support housing uh and housing for special groups. So special needs groups really there's uh I believe six different special needs groups that are addressed within um the uh plan for special needs. Uh so what how these programs do what they will do is again reflect the community input feedback from uh from you all and from city council um and they address the analysis that that's completed within how the element um how the element addresses any constraints and gaps maybe uh within uh um the existing plan. Um it also identifies the resources for both um financial and uh uh land resources and also identify some mitigating factors for some of these interests. Uh the housing elements have specific action. We'll go into an example in a bit include the time frame and funding source and then who is responsible for. So here we'll see this is a real a real action real 2011. This simply means Louisable foundations foundations is really uh or um any persons with disabilities asking for uh a deviation from what the zoning code allows so they can live comfortably in the home ramps um uh like a lift so that they can get

into their home. So the zoning code may not allow it or may not explicitly pull it out. Um but if through the um uh various uh federal and state acts um cities jurisdictions must allow this. this action specifically. So that was what the action is was just to make sure that was compliant. So every so often review laws to ensure it's um and also it includes an action to identify you know any resources persons with disabilities um so they can help them achieve this uh competitions. So geog every action has a geographic target. Sometimes it's identified with sometimes it's high resource areas uh problem areas stuff like that it's required foundation so it's everybody with disability it's that time frame is an adoption by uh uh yeah amendment to foundation procedures of June 26 which is right on the corner um uh and that responsible agency can plan this out the original other actions maybe CG uh or resources. Uh so now we go on to site selection. I think this is a part that that was already kind of put on on the previous item. I think it it's more appropriate to discuss the list item. U again literally the city's not required to develop housing. U cities don't have the development can't build housing. Uh but you are required to uh identify enough capacity. zone and that could last for approximately. Um so within the six cycle um we went into the six cycle acknowledging that um and also acknowledging that housing should be uh integrated with different uh resources services. We don't kind of want housing just isolated especially with some of the um that that low to no income where

we people don't have access to a car or read have access sharing or public transport. So we make sure that um to the best of our ability as I said identify those signific services public transport um and have either existing or potential access um again there's the act of affirmatively fair housing which also um early in the analysis of of the existing zoning uh we determined that the city does have enough zoning capacity to to identify enough sites um or to meet the arena. Um so if we were to identify you know the exact same sites we have now with the existing zoning it would we wouldn't be able to so that that's kind of where that reasoning effort into the picture but again it's also um was meant to exist of the general fund. So um the thing about all the fires is that all all housing all general plan elements are internally consistent. Uh same with these codes. So um we the way coordination with general plan identify that you know these parts. Um the center for also considered they sell parcel size vacancies uh access to resources we can put in receive from city uh this is really the big picture there's a lot going on here uh big things I want to point out um are our existing capacity list um passing that we identify on uh existing but existing residentially and makes use of parcels but also pipeline projects. So this includes projects that were um already

approved and titled but permits haven't been so we can take advantage of those projects. uh pip projects also uh consume applications that are going through process uh and may um meaning as a pipeline project doesn't approve those applications um it just uh acknowledges that they're in the pipeline and they may be approved at some time period um then we have the res strategies that we see both of the sites um identified but uh want to show that the total development capacity was 800 8,600 sorry 8,364 units um and that's including all of the strategies so existing capacity and the res um that gives us a healthy surplus um of units so that in case one nor you know a dozen of these sites don't actually develop the way you know was anticipated we still have a buffer in place so we don't have to go back and update the house every to that situation or you might have a negative uh that's considered that cost. Um here I'm going to kind of fly by through these but we can during discussion if you want to go into them but um here we're looking at pipeline projects. These are projects that were already approved uh and entitled but haven't had per all the permits pulled or projects that were currently. Uh here are the downtown areas. You'll see they're kind of all generally around the downtown area. Um these uh the parcels are proposed to be 30 to 175 buildings. Um so at the end of the street there's the um uh there was renovation of the building where now there's four units above uh the

commercial that that project was 44. Yes. So the 500s in bonito going above forgive me if it's I don't think it's cosmos anymore but um the old molester house both Phoenix that is developed at 125 billion an acre. So that type of project in our downtown is what this general plan and how we want to support and the 400 block is about 98 units a so that kind of three four stories this project is what is

yeah so these totals they they look huge u but when we look at real projects you know that's kind of what what they can look like um and it's not regulated to just look like that can be its own project but that was a test but through this zone strategy. Um uh we projected a net in uh yeah unit allocation of 750. I know we have the high residential zones. Um so these parcels are uh projected sometime about 2,266 units. Uh the three zones uh this is,82 units. The west gateway uh Louisiana area is 871 units. And then the north gateway area is Uh so now we get to next step. So on February 12th uh uh this year so last month we got the stat storage compliance letter. So that's it should be saying your housing element as is complies with all statutes but we can't uh certify you until all the proposed res are complete. Um so once the housing element is uh adopted res um we can resubmit or submit the final uh package of all the stats HD and they have system that provide a response which um if adopted as um as proposed would be a certain we're here uh on 26 March uh next uh item or the public hearing for the city council will be on April 20th. Um and once uh a decision is made um whatever that is a senact the final act will be sensitive to doing its um but I do want to note that that's not the end of the road uh there's still implementation of the action so every housing action has its ownation schedule within housing so that's what um with that the reation

yes so thank you Brian and our recommendation tonight uh Mr. the resolution recommen approval of this and adoption of to do we have any questions from the commission do we can now open the public hearing at 8:09 staff do we have public comments on this item I will just note again for the record um these are the same comment letters but two of the letters that we received Um for the general plan also address the housing element. So for the record comment received from PIPO as well as high school district. Thank you. Plus, we have a speaker online, please. Chris P.

Good evening. My name is Chris Pito, 1011 Commino Delmare, San Diego. Um, as uh shown in the staff report, there was a request uh that we remove RZ-W8, which is APN0520945, from the six cycle housing element in its entirety. As staff noted, we've had multiple conversations by removing this property from the six cycle housing element, there's enough buffer in place that it will not cause any delays, penalties, or otherwise. We recommend that removing we we request that removing this uh be added to the staff report or to the item that's going to be voted on this evening. Uh with the recommendation going to the city council. Uh this will tie into the other request that we've made. Um and as the next step slide noted, uh part of what they're doing is the reszone. Uh making sure that everything is compliant. And this is in line with the tabled item one and our request to reszone that general commercial which would allow the uh proposed project to proceed. Um that's it for me. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Yes. Yes.

Our next speaker is Carson Coller. Hi again Carson Flower registar not speaking to half wasn't planning on speaking on this item but review so might as well talk about the fact it's going to be a weird comment because I think you should adopt it um but the whole thing is a charade because you're being forced to comply with the state's rules and roughly eight or 10 years of housing policy means means that you don't have enough sites to actually plan for units that you need. I think we need to be able to hold two truths in our mind at the same time. One is you have infrastructure problems, specifically the roads. The second is you have a housing affordability crisis. It's been like that for probably 15 years. And any housing affordability crisis stems from a lack of supply. We all had to take economics in high school. If you don't have enough houses, they get more expensive. Um, Reena, the N in Reena is needs. Your community needs more units. This plan is not going to give them the units that they need. The city doesn't build. The city plans are hypothetical units. People don't live in hypothetical units. So, if your plan does not actually allow for units to be built, it's not worth the paper that is written on. This has been going on for a long time. I don't blame staff. I don't blame the consultants. I don't blame you guys. But this is the actual situation that it's a paper unit of 8,000 potential units, but you've zoned it in a way that it cannot easily be built. The community does not want that type of project. It's very unlikely that it will be built. Um I believe you have a policy, a draft policy in here that says that you don't get units. You have to look for more sites. This is kind of my first warning.

you're going to have to come back and look for more sites because you are not going to see the numbers of units that your community needs. It you got to look at it holistically. I'm not going to tell you exactly how to do it, but this is not it. Um I did a search for somebody for a rental unit. The smallest least desirable units are $2,000 a month.

A normal house is $3,500 a month. If you want to buy a market rate house, it's $5 to $6,000 for your mortgage per month. That is a supply problem. It's not the only problem with it, but it's a supply problem. Just as an example, the slide said 755 potential units in the downtown mixed use area. I would be very surprised if you have 100 now. And that's after 150 years of planning and construction. Probably not 100 units downtown. I probably don't need to go into specifics on this, but a lot of those sites most likely are not cleared for Aposola. So those sites are not going to be built on because somebody would have to spend $100,000 to find out that they can't build them. The other part is that are all those sites in the downtown parking district? If they're not, you have to plan for the parking involved with that. So there's there's a lot of problems here and adopt it, but it's not going to solve your problems. Thank you. technical difficulties. Our next speaker is Hi again. I would I would agree with what was said about none of those pictures or houses. Um I think the developer just spoke earlier and all the developers that we spoke to is they will not build it 30 units ac

the public own properties project which was about 90 units on a 4 and a half acres there with some commercial rather than commercial too people in Hollister. Um this is what all could be rented out and it would have been e economically uh integrated project like we're talking about the need for here. Um, if you go to 30 units per week, that's what was 20 units a week. But now you go to 30, the costs go up a unit. Underground parking, you have to higher higher elevation of more stories. Um, different construction budget completely. Um and so it starts as rank units it starts not to fit the house not doesn't start it does not fit the house if they don't. So um that's the reality. These are numbers on paper and I think there's the calculations I look at you can you can make the state happy enough without having to have artificial numbers on paper but that's there's breaker it doesn't doesn't work that's not my opinion that's open to talk to thank The next speaker is Chris Ventino.

Hi. Um I so I just would like to reiterate that uh regarding the Union Road special uh planning area that uh this be part of your um which you're going to vote on today is a a revision of that u LU141 and adopt and we're adopt something that's consistent with the general plan designation and in the letter that I gave you it it has the language which we're offering as health which and I'm just going to reiterate it real quick. Development within the Union Road special planning area may proceed consistent with adopted general plan land use designations and zoning. Reparation of a specific plan shall not preude or delay considerations or approval of individual development application. And I really feel that this would solve a lot of future problems with this how it's written out. I also have a card for guys. It's your lucky day. This is like line up a pair of dots and just keep shooting all day and talk on everyone. Um I was just curious couple questions maybe you can ask when you guys go back to discussion is um on the housing element does the property have to be in the city limits or you include property I I assume the sphere of influence too. Um, and I say this because the gentleman just spoke ahead of me about the union road area probably

should have been put in this housing element for these housing units that you're looking for and not some of the other stuff that's on better ground and not surrounded by housing. Um, again, I'm going to you guys need to map out, drive around and look at what these things are. And it doesn't matter if it's this thing or anything else that happens in life in the city. And I would hope that you would go to your city council person that you're representing in your district and tell them about what happened here tonight. I have to say one thing about the slideshow. On one of the slide it says assumes 20 acres per 20 units per acre for low income which you guys want in the general fund with 30, you know. So, and this is a paper deal. You got to do it to get the state money. But you got a problem. This is an indirect way. And I'm going to go on Parson's comment. a way of controlling growth. So the no growth is controlling growth by doing this. But let's just hypothetically say the world changes and all of a sudden you got a housing element that allows them to build 8,000 h units. Yeah, we got a buffer baby. But what happens if somebody comes in here with no plenty and says, "Hey, I want I want I want I want What's to stop them? The state's not going to stop them. It's got to be careful what you ask for. That is a a lacious number. And you you the people that are trying to do this might be kicking themselves in their own um

you know what area. Um and you don't need a bigger sphere of influence to do what we need to do. that that I would say the sphere of influence on the general funds is perfectly fine to do the 4,000 beans. It's just how it's being done. There's question just for for paper. You better be careful to do this for paper.

You don't have any more speakers. Okay. We will close the public hearing at 8:21. Um, any other discussion from the commission?

Was there any quantitative analysis probably?

Uh, I can get those numbers for you. We did not. We definitively exceeded our market rate. I want to say we built about 2,200 far rate units. So for me numbers um over about our reno was 1308 total and market rate was only a portion of that and then but we did not meet any of our affordability requirements in this. Um I could also answer the question uh if if the commission pleases on the does the property have city limits. Yes, it does. So we cannot we cannot look into the county. We cannot look into the general plan sphere. Uh the land use is proposed in the hidden plan. That is part of why there was a challenge behind sites because we are required to have sites in the city limits. Currently you can't use a potential annexation as questions. I have a question. It's my understanding that the county is also struggling with the housing element. Is that correct?

No. It's also my understanding. I think one of the speakers said this, it's very clear that we're going to meet our market rate possibly u our market rate fails. Correct.

I would say that that that's certainly reasonable again. So So In in my my understanding is we're going to meet the market rate but we've never I don't think ever hit the affordable housing rate the super low the low and I think that just comes to the point but the market's not going to the market will not produce before that's just historically is that is that would you agree I don't know if that's where has that occurred definitely more difficult yeah like naturally occurring affordable housing for those moving forward. Okay.

I mean that's technically why there have to be programs by the subsidized side.

I I just want to contextualize this for the crowd that someone said that this plan is to kind of build housing. And there were there were a lot of people who did not want agriculture land us building on you know sprawling out rancho Santana not so big anymore that's a perfect example of of a parcel that probably should not have been built was outside of city it was a massive project I don't want to take on more particular projects but that is the goal of this of this housing it was to say look you don't want more single family development. We want to bring we want it higher density. Trust me, I 8,000 units were for were to come in tomorrow. I wouldn't want that either. I don't think people want this. I I think realistically, like someone said, it's not going to be built. Um,

but the I'm sorry, that's just a statement. No, what I'm saying is the goal of this, I think, is is is just that is to stop the urban sprawl. And I think it achieves that goal. Whether the units get built, that's up to the market, I guess. or anything to add to what you're saying and I mean no trying to clarify but to add to what you were saying I think that also in the numbers that were shown there were less for low income right versus the higher income

yeah and I did receive a question about that u and it's an important question so um when we identify sites you can't like select one site to be 100% um although we did do that with two sites uh because there was the intent I believe cheese on sale site. Yes. Yeah.

So did they had an intent to develop that 100% forward but we can't do that for you know a random not a random parcel like a parcel identifier. Um so you have to have essentially a ratio. So um for most zone areas that ratio is 20% is lower income um and then the rest the other 80% for the other income categories. So naturally, you're only going to have 20% of every site is going to be lower income. So that's why you see the buffer is lower for lower income. And as you get higher income categories, um because it's more realistic for those categories to develop, those buffers are going to be high.

But it it it plays into what we're talking about, right? If it's what they were talking about the numbers being and and it doesn't help the people that are living here, you can't afford it. It doesn't help us, you know, to say it was only it's not your fault. I think everyone's it's not anyone's fault. Everyone's got a mandate, right? And we have a responsibility to do this. But it is true what the comments that they were saying. We're like I think it's got to start with Sacramento, you know, because it's just it's unrealistic. But it is still I think 37% of the time units are low, right? uh it's on the slide I don't remember

40% of families are oh correct yeah 40% of the allocation is about 37% so it's all um on the how many units are planned for the population um the only way to switch is to my concern is I'm not against development it's just a commercial kind economic development and we also affordable housing

and trying to do both in one seems like we're going to supply the entire So and looking at the overages that you know have been allocated even if all these projects were having right now were to drop off they will still be over right but it will come at a cost proced they're always if they get resone for so I I don't know I just feel like the the unit is industry is right but it's really dropping it's

you know I don't do So I'm holding this up for that. There is resolution again at a cost but there's resolution for those projects. Um was there to resone something you don't fit all the requirements or how we process someone that wants to resone and amendment. Yes. So so there is a process to amend the general plan and then the zoning ramp um do both annex the project. Um so individually any property owner could come to the council first and then um ultimately there's no requirements that there would be approved or not approved or reopening.

No. So so a project that is uh not discretionary if you will like we see site reviews come before you. Uh what we're reviewing is for consistency with the general plan and the code as they are. Um but a project proponent could also propose I'd like to propose this project to you city and it requires you to amend your general plan to be a different zoning and that is an application that we can process and that is something that could be approved if the city wants to make that policy document change to support that. And are we limited to four per year or sub?

You're limited to four general fund amendments per year but the city could if we got a lot of applications out once you could bring them forward and then group them. So you know five could become one. So there's a pathway further than what we thought and even we could even I think to what you said before we could approve with consideration for like the 30 or the offering opportunities for amendments or the you know

Yes. So, so definitely the planning commission could make a recommendation to the council that is to approve this with a change or to approve it, but we have concerns about this for you to consider. But maybe, you know, it's a complicated issue and maybe we don't have the exact right answer and maybe it's something to consider in the future after an approval or we can definitely bring forward as staff and through your motion what it is that you would like to portray to the council about your feedback on your staff that that's your negative way but I mean I one I think we got to realize that the people that are going to invested in in these developments are going to be ultimately looking at their bottom line. And that's why I mean I remember the whole discussion of needed 5% becoming an issue or 5 to 10% I think it was um they wanted to move up to 10% requirement rolling from right based off the public sides or whatever and ultimately it's like you do that I'm not investing right it's like too much I mean there's a reason why get sp so my point is one I think commercial I I I think one to send a message I firmly believe to those that are going to invested in infrastructure um you know because there you're only going to get onetime impacts and you're not going to send any positive message to the um business that you welcome to business but two if you if you want to adopt this I really do believe there should be some type of a process in no offense to staff but I think it's got to have a little bit more of of you know the public ready there's city council having more engagement in the process or us how it works out but where there's a little bit more of a

check and balance from the public standpoint right now it's just supposed to be administrative just like that one element um it was a client actually what was it conversation having to do with being only administrative procedure that means we're completely out of the picture so things fall apart we don't know that's part of the reason why separate point but relates to I have made a recommendation that technically there should be a shorter time frame for any kind of project to have an appeal process and not be triggered by just a denial. It should actually be more where the applicant has a right to say let me present back to the project give you some real time evidence of why it's still a bad idea or whatever giving us an opportunity to embed it at the beginning of the project versus two years away before you know it. They're long gone, right? They don't care about and we're we're struggling. We need to address those.

We have a motion. One more question. Is there a minimum order that we have to have?

So, in state law, there's no specific uh it doesn't speak to what that specific need would be like overage. Uh but there is a SP uh off my head I can't remember right now but it's a no net loss uh law. So essentially if you if one or more of your sites which the negative for doing that you have to you have 180 days to come back sites. So that essentially means you have to unmet your um so that's why that general guidance um that we received from HCB is usually about 30%. Um but it it really depends on jurisdiction and sorry dumb question from cycles were they considered and cycles

no generally not there's no dumb question. Um I have one more uh just clarification from the public speaker. They talked about APN 052090045 if that was identified to be removed.

Yes. So this is the site at the uh southwest corner of Fourth Street and Renook. Um it's the same sweeper um speaking route. We got a letter. Um their request is to remove the site. Um, so that's ultimately a policy decision. Um, but the planning commission could recommend to the council to to consider that. Um, and we we've done the numbers and the applicants team has also submitted numbers um that it's within the buffer. So it it could be removed and that that would support a potential freezone project submitted by them that would not require us to further amend the housing. Thank you for clarifying. Okay. Uh, is there a motion?

I'll make a motion to accept the

6.2 six cycle element. Did you guys hear that? To approve. I'll make a motion to approve the six cycle housing element. Uh, item 6.2. Is there any uh what is there a second? I think we did. I think I have to ask for a second before. So, so no, looks like you don't have a second. So, is there another motion? Motion to adopt um the element 6.2 to recommendations with

with a revision with a revision and then you and private revisions. Um I would like to if I can with this one to u to remove APN052-09-045.

Would you accept that friendly amendment commissioner please? Yes. And I'll set the first place. And do we want to add anything about the commercial? Is this appropriate for this housing? It's just housing. Okay. And all in favor? I. Anyone oppose? Okay. Move on to 6.3 zoning ordinance 2026-2 to repeal and replace the zoning map consistent with the 2040.

Good evening. Uh Miss Kelly will once again lead you through an outline of what is be replaced. This zoning map is relevant to the general move to the end, but we feel that you can still consider it to feel Yes, thank you. I'll take the podium. Sorry. The next couple of items. So, yes, item 6.3 is a the first of several ordinances related to resoning and amending our zoning ordinance and their zoning map to be consistent with the supposed 23 general plan. Um the reason that we brought these forward all together is due to the timelines of our housing element and the need to get certification as soon as possible. And part of that certification is to um do the reszones which is both this item which is our zoning map amendment and also textual reszones to our ordinances to make sure that those sets accommodate the need. So this is zoning ordinance amendment 236-2 which is specifically related to the deal and the placement of the official zoning map of the city of Hollister. Um as mentioned we have prepared the draft 2040 general plan which was an item we earlier and there are several land use changes for the general plan for properties that are located within city limits. We have some changes to um residential and a few changes throughout. And so this item tonight replaces the official zoning app and adopts a new zoning app that has uses that are all consistent with our general planations. So, we are proposing as staff and this

will also be reflected in the text amendments from proposing to make a few um technical changes to the zoning designations to clarify it and go with all of our zoning amendments that we've been working towards to make things easier. One of the things that we are proposing is to change all of our residential zones to have a fleet starting with Rash. We currently have a couple of Oldtown medium and Oldtown high density designations that are OTM OTH. They don't really indicate that they're residential. So those are just across the board RA and then their related abbreviation to make our residential zones look a little bit more consistent and clear that they're resident. We also currently have the R2 which is a two family residential zoning district. There's not very many properties, but it is essentially a duplex only zoning district. Um, staff, we're recommending to eliminate this zoning designation. It's actually zoned over properties that currently are both low density residential and medium density residential in our general plan. So, it's not it's not even consistent with one general plan designation in our current general plan. And some of the amendments that the planning commission has submitted before when we updated our use tables is to already allow duplex as a type of unit in our low density and duplex as a type of unit in our medium density. So there's no reason to have instant a duplex specific zoning district. it's quite restrictive and density and land use use tables kind of move um as opposed to making arrow z. So we're proposing to eliminate this land use designation in the zoning map and simply keep our low density residential and medium density residential within that to the designations. Um we are also proposing to eliminate

the current R420 zoning designation that we have which is called high density multifamily residential. There are currently no parcels with this zoning. This was a fifth cycle housing element creation to uh up the minimum density to 20 units an acre in the fifth cycle to accommodate affordable housing on particular projects. Um, with the 2020 general plan designations, um, there's a change to our medium, as we kind of talked about, expanding medium density to the 11 to 29 units an acre and high density residential being 30 to 65. And so this R420 doesn't really mesh with either of those designations. And so we're just proposing a medium density residential and a high density residential district, but opposed to two against resident children. We are also making a change that you may have heard about or or may recall coming forward when we amended in September 2023 the plan development ordinance um to allow and expand plan developments to not just move for residential for a little bit of a minor setback with SCP but now it's a resonate process that allows for a lot more flexibility and it allows for commercial to become part of development and the plan was always to come forward with a map amendment that changed our performance overlay zoning districts which are these TZ is the current zoning designation. Um it's kind of a general designation that said there's this opportunity for a flexible smooth with this zoning map. staff of proposing to designate all of the former plan unit development projects in the city with their specific reference numbers to help us find documents for those projects because they just

generally call R3 MPZ and they'll tell you what the project and where to find a resolution. Um and then in the future as new plan developments come online they would give reference plan development. Um I've been working with JS which I'll get into a little bit to uh assign these zoning districts by parcel for this in alignment with this zone map and to align these plan development numbers with each parcel that's within them and we are able to I believe and that's something we're working on actually link all the resolution do documents for these plan developments so that you can click in the GIS and click in the buying through the property. So we are proposing no PZ zoning anymore. Um everything was paid with a member directly representing the project special. As I mentioned, I've been working with our Sanino County GIS staff to create this zoning layer and the general plan layer in our GIS portal. um the bulk plan would be to go live where this ordinance becomes effective. We currently do not have accurate zoning in GIS which makes it very difficult. So while you look at a paper map and this PDF map that will be the official zoning map of the city but from a technical perspective each will now have its zoning it'll have its 140 general plan designation. So make for staff for applicants for property owners a lot easier to find there. So, I've been working with GIS to make these layers this. Here's just another example. I kind of overlay them because I wanted to make sure you could maybe see, but this is the general plan GI escalator or the zoning board on the left. You can see that city hall, it's downtown mixed use.

You can see the second line. It's zoning at downtown use. It's got the abbreviation DMV. It's got the 2040 general plan right there. Um, and then on the right, this is the quest of fairly plan development. And so you can see it says PD2-7 and the link documents right here in DS. With that, um, I'm recommending right to adopt a resolution recommending approval of zoning ordinance amendment 26-2 for the council as the focus of the app. Thank you. Do you have any questions?

It would only be updated if there was a reasonzoning to the books or general fun amendment and a reasoning to the books. So, this currently doesn't change or alter any. It doesn't alter any of the distinctions. It may it does have land use partial changes but they are exactly the same. They all match one to one with the different according speifications that are okay. Thank you. And can we open the public hearing at 8:46 and do we have any public comments?

We do not have any spoken. All right, then we will go ahead and close this public hearing at 8:46. Is there any further discussion from the commission? Do we have a motion? We have a motion portion of those to be cons. I'll second. All in favor?

Anyone? Anyone oppose? Extain. Okay. Motion carries. 64. uh amendments to the zoning ordinance related to implementation of goals and policies. And as you can see, Miss Kelly will once again present this. This is a supportive item to the implementation of the actual housing.

May we have the staff report? Yes, please.

Yes. So this item is in similar fashion to the zoning map that we just saw. We checked the amendments to the uh zoning ordinance um the other uh that we are making to um implement the housing element res. So um this is uh zoning ordinances the planning commission has not seen before but we are proposing all the tax amendments that are necessary in order to achieve certification compliance from the state for our housing element. We this is a list of some of the immediate actionable housing element policies that we need to do in order to achieve compliance. The big one is going to be H1.3 that first one which is our six cycle arena strategy. So we actually have to put the zonings on the map. We have to put the zones so we the zoning board ordinance to meet the arena. Um but we also need to adopt uh objective design standards. We need to remove development constraints. We need to accommodate some particular types of housing like agriculture and employee housing in terms of supportive housing that are not currently in our code. We need to make some changes like reasonable accommodation. We talked about that example policy. That's one of the ones that we need to adopt in order to get certification. And again, fair homes is a use type that we need to make sure we have. Excellent. Um, it's a little bit small, but this is kind of what we were just talking about with the zoning map. We are proposing to eliminate the two family residential 25704 table of uses and table of zoning districts that we have. And we're

proposing to eliminate the items that multi-im 420 as a zoning resation in this code. But we are also proposing set those R dash abbreviations. So you guys wrote them in R2. We're proposing that median density becomes RM instead of R3. There's no R2 anymore. High density would be RH. We get those old towns as R OM RF West specific brand which has its own designation currently. and we're adding the um residential mobile home which is currently on our zoning map but it doesn't have any textual alignments or references. So we're adding the mobile home park designations and reference into our residential zone districts to make sure that that's for the housing. We are proposing to add supportive housing and transitional housing to all of our residential zoning districts is a permitted by right use. This is required by state law and is by two of our policy actions in housing element. And we are also modifying table 1704-2 which is the development standards for residential zoning districts to make some changes to address some of our constraints that we have and also to accommodate any densities that are modified by the general plan. So we are proposing to eliminate minimum lot size and lot depth because those are quite restrictive even currently and don't allow for a lot of the use types that we have a lot of the densities we currently have and they certainly don't accommodate potentially the revisions to the density. And so what we are going for as staff to help things be easier and to give more flexibility to development is to

eliminate these unnecessary constraints and let use types and densities guide development pattern as opposed to you know if you say that it has to be a 5,000 foot lot it's going to be hard to accommodate a potential small lot single family housing type of development. Uh we are proposing to amend in the same fashion lot coverage for the oldtown um zoning districts to match the medium high density um zoning districts that's already currently allowed and adjusting some height requirements for the high PCB to those density requirements. We are also clarifying some language in the west of Fairley Road um zoning district which aligns directly with the West specific plan and we've removed quite a bit of subjective language about design standards which I'll talk a little bit more about but we have a lot of subjective things and as we've discussed with the commission many times state law has pretty much eliminated any subjectivity when considering design of any type of housing. And so in order to get certified in our housing element, we need to remove that subjective requirements. Um we are proposing and I'll talk about in a little bit a design standards chapter pulling those design standards out of all of our zoning districts and putting them in place. Um and we are also proposing the same thing for open space requirements. All of this is about removing these development constraints that are currently in our code as part of our requirements. We are proposing to add a new chapter 1707 for mixed use residential

commercial zoning districts. Currently um our chapter 1708 is commercial and mixed use. So we have our general commercial and commercial office and our downtown list. They're all mushed into one chapter. We think it'd be easier for staff for the planning commission for applicants to have mixed use requirements in one chapter, general commercial for commercial only zone requirements in another chapter. So adding chapter 1707 that is a new chapter just about mixed use. It does add more gateway mixed use which is reflective of the change that's proposed in the 2020 general plan. but otherwise it's outlined in the same kind of like order as our other. So you've got a use table, you've got a design or a requirements table that densities and setbacks and those types of things. Um and then we've added single room occupancy, transitional housing and supportive housing has permitted uses in our mixed use districts. Um we did not add single room occupancy to residential. we thought mixed use especially as it's supposed to be a higher density type development next a hotel transformed or something like that um into a single room occupancy type facility we felt adding it as per use state requirements um and then again for excuses with this being said our current chapter 78 miracle without an excuse This will just be our general commercial and our commercial office commercial chapter. So we edit in these tables reflect just those two zoning designations edited the um table for requirements of setbacks and things like that. It just has these two zoning speifications in it. Staff are proposing to do minor modifications

to our land use tables for our commercial zoning districts. The first is we are proposing to change minor vehicle repair facilities that are currently not permitted in general commercial. We're proposing to change that to limit. Um we currently have a lot of our facilities like u you know Chevron RSV they're in general commercial which currently that's not a permitted use and it caused a lot of problems for owners for business owners for transitioning these businesses. Um, and a lot of these vehicle affairs are currently in this designation and are considered non-conforming software supposeding to allow to change that to allow it's a reasonable general commercial use. And so we'd like to make that a little bit clear existing in future. We are also proposing currently medical clinics and laboratories which is going to be anything from the therapist office to a podiatrist's office are not or they're allowed but they require an administrative permit review which is a staff level ministerial permit but it goes through our development committee. It's a whole process. That's currently the requirement for these types of clinics that are minor in their nature. They're we're proposing to make that also a permitted by right use in commercial office and general commercial district so that doctor's offices and things like that they just come in just like a restaurant by right. So those are actually language changes we're proposing. It doesn't have anything to do with housing element but we're editing this chapter with those two. We also are removing all of the current design standards for commercial and mixed use out of the commercial zone district's chapter into a new design

standards chapter again. So all design centers are located in places. This is a new chapter that we're proposing in 17 to 16114 which is about open space requirements for residential projects projects. We are proposing um modifications to our open space requirements because it's been a consistent factor that we hear uh the the requirements are too high. We make the open housing apartments. It's too it's currently 500 ft per unit um which is just infeasible for any type of development. There's not really a single building. So we are proposing in our downtown district which is one of the highest density proposals an intent to redevelop and offer the opportunity for development of these upper floors to remove private building space requirements entirely and to require just a major amenity for larger projects 26 to 200 units or two major amenities for 2011 plus units. And a major amenity is leaving it quite flexible. But that could be a pool, a gym, a rooftop garden, a indoor outdoor. It's really up to the developers. providing one sort of common use factor but leaving it flexible to to make it possible to accommodate some sort of we are also proposing to split requirements for open space for multif family developments into small scale projects or larger projects. So for a small scale project, we're proposing to eliminate a common open space requirement. We're trying to make less units. You know, this could be a small like garden lot type project. It could be, you know, three duplexes or even a few, you know, triplexes or something

like that. Having a common open space requirement, it doesn't make a lot of sense, especially because all these small scale projects, you probably have a private yard of some kind of private bathroom. So small scale, we're proposing to eliminate the cost open space. We just plan for five now. Um and for larger projects, proposing to reduce the private open space that's currently I believe 250 ft of unit down to 64 ft unit, which is like a typical balcony size, and then just have a minor amenity or a major amenity depending size. Where else? Quick question. Um, so we say full space that's like instead of the far common area like a whole courtyard or something, you keep something smaller, more scale to the size of the unit.

Yeah, exactly. So, there's a distinction between private open space, which is going to be your backyard, your back. It's only accessible to your common open space, which is like if you're in an apartment complex, you might have a gym or you might have a pool or you might have a rooftop garden or an office space, something for all of the members of the apartment complex or all the members of the, you know, complex homes group apart. Um, and so it makes more sense at scale to have that requirement for an amenity. A barbecue area for a mediumsiz project is fine, but we, you know, it could be a revenue for something bigger like a pool of course for these bigger projects. So scaling the requirement and required amenity to the actual number of units to accommodate both these small projects that doesn't make sense to require for 10 units or three duplexes six units um having a a 400 foot park. You know that doesn't necessarily make sense. So we're proposing to kind of scale and change the requirements to be more accommodating to kind of flexible types of multi. And then we're also proposing along a similar vein adding some requirements in for mobile home park but we've tailored it to what you typically see in a mobile home park which is a small kind of private open space area that's near your unit. So 100 is supposed to be the private open space but then an appropriately designed minor or major centralized depending on the scale of project.

Can I um ask about the you said so the 11 plus units? Yes. It's just 11 or more.

Yes. So we split. So multif family is going to be 10 or fewer is going to be that small scale requirement. So 10 or fewer multif family units is not going to require a common just private. There is a requirement for private. So every unit would have a private space but no common space for that small. And then if we're 11 or or more 64 square ft of private. So every unit all 11 or all 200 whatever it might be have a private space. But for 11 to 25 it would just move minor amenity which would be like a child play area or a barbecue pit. as you get bigger than 25 or even two. The other chapter I've alluded to is uh new 1730 design standards. Um what we have done is pulled all of those commercial requirements which are allowed to be subjective because it's commercial. So we're not making any real changes to the content of those commercial requirements. Just pulling them out into this chapter here. But we are proposing again under Senate Bill 35 SB30 objective standards are required for residential projects. And so we have drafted previously. I don't think this commission has seen them but in the past the commission saw some pretty basic like pulled from the state single family home design standards objective design standards. And so we were proposing to put those in. They were never adopted. They went to the council. Uh but this will ensure that we have objective standards for single family that we kind of things like um like facade setback so the garage like the walkway through the sideyard so people can all couple of things that we can enforce.

So we could talk more about 1730 but these are real basic um objective standards for single family models. We have another item about objective standards for the downtown. This chapter does not include any down design standards. The goal is that this is a temporary chapter to accommodate the functional reorganizations that we're trying to do. Um and the ultimate goal of our building or above all is to come back and really discuss in design requirements and all safeties and all of these meetings. We can talk about requirements and things like that at those those future meetings. This is reorganization to make sure what I was just talking about these zoning ordinance amendments. Well, they're they're both exempt from SEA, but they are also the system of because they're being assist with plans and our housing element. So they do not require further environmental review. And so in conclusion, we are proposing this kind of series of chapter amendments to reflect the both policies of our successful housing element and bringing them forward to keep us moving along the path and certifying that positive element. Um, and if we are modifying zoning, do we have any questions? She says deputed

in the packet for you. So what we're looking tonight as far

No, that's the next item. Any other questions before we go to public hearing? Let's open the public hearing at 9:06 p.m. Staff, do we have any public comments on this item? Yes, we have Christo or M.

Hi, uh Chris Po again11 Commamino Delmare San Diego. Um this item pertains to the table item 61 6.2 and otherwise. And so I'm going to make the request um consistently just because the first item was was tabled. Um I'm requesting that the planning commission choose the option to amend what is presented before you tonight and your recommendation to the city council and not accept the language as presented. I'm asking that staff be directed to have APN05209045 designated classified in all circumstances as general commercial and that the commission should note for the record that APN5209045 will not be required to include any residential and/or housing. We would also ask that you direct staff that if the modifications are made to zoning code and applicants like myself who have active planning applications that we can amend the applications to comply with general commercial zoning and are grandfathered into all other items at the time of the original planning submitt. This is more or less in tied into some of the items that Eva was presenting um including but not limited to 17.30 30 design standards with the new requirements potentially again requiring certain items on a project like this have been identified elsewhere within the items before you tonight that could potentially require not only the housing density but three-story buildings parking in certain areas and other items. And by placing this in general commercial and giving direction to staff, it helps alleviate that item. Most of these things are done with um more of a hammer when you're proving all these items and we're requesting a little bit more of a scalpel precision with this particular project. Thank you. That's it.

We have to speak. I would also like to read verses 69 62. Uh my reason is actually received a message now from Victor Gomez. He mentioned him before by prior mayor of the city of Alistister and he was strongly about trying to make things work for the city with the city. And again referring to the to the mixed use zoning now now requiring 30 years later whereas two years ago was 20 20 years he'd really like to see that lower. So I'd like to make a specific request. We have I mentioned our presence in downtown or near downtown serve up that empty land there. Uh from uh Naple to San Die uh to Borneo Bakers if a project like the one that RP was suggesting and whether they're so interested I can't say at this point but with a struct 30 because of the cost increase again it wasn't wasn't enough the market and because we had nothing but rejections by developers looking at property but stuck with 30% I'd like to request for two parcel numbers. Let those be that you amend your recommendations. You remove those two parcels. You have some chance of actually seeing a very nice residential commercial unit with the state and state stay home

commercial uh 90 units on that property. It's not going to be low low density but it's going to be affordable and um there was two partial numbers 05102 017 and 0510219 and um I meant to be changed to 20 minutes but I'd really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. I have a speaker tomorrow. Okay. Uh, no more speakers.

Thank you. Do we have Oh, the hearing at 911 p.m. And do we have further discussion from the commission? I don't know if this is the appropriate time, but um 05 partial number um 051 020 0 0170 from the speaker. Is this the appropriate time to talk about that or to

these are the text amendments. Um so reszoning anything would not necessar like this doesn't speak to zoning designations of parcels. These are the requirements of each of the resations and then it parcel is done at something. So that would be the map or the general plan. So we should have done that with the general plan. Yeah. You could do it with the general plan. Okay. Awesome. So

any other discussion? to add to that then also the request of the 30 minutes that is also part of we'll talk about if we wanted to talk about that at the general right yes yes okay um do we have a motion options to approve

uh yes so it would be to adopt a resolution with the recommendation so recommendation or you want to approve it. Do you want to approve it? Amendments or not? 6.5. Correct. 6.5. Yeah, I spoke. 6.4. 6.4. Oh, no. 6.4. Sorry. I'll make a motion to accept the staff recommendation um action for at 6.4 and then uh resigning all the choices of the policy C6 only.

Second before we take the vote just to clarify just want to make sure the commercial uh topic we've talked about is also part of the general plan. zoning. It's zoning and and what I will say is that if the planning commission makes the recommendation and the council takes the recommendation and wants to make a change with the general plan, we'll bring will amend this either through the council's right. The goal is to match the general plan. Yes. So, take a vote. All in favor? I

I any oppose? Nope. Okay. Motion carries. Now 6.5 phase three zoning ordinance amendments related to permits and procedures. And so again with this item that Miss Charlie presenting uh also as you may recall past bank commission meetings we had Miss Frasier leading through subsequent incremental sessions to discuss these changes and they really seek to clarify permitting requirements provide some factor approval processes for some smaller projects and to also authority for staff and the public Please, please. While we while we pull it up, this is the zoning ordinance 2035-4. This is the procedure chapters as fant introduced. This is the procedures that this planning commission has seen over the past full study sessions that we've been having about nine month period. um to update all of our funding procedures for clarity um to have consistency with meters and permit types again to bring some things back down to the staff level um to speed up processes for people and

then we are also so what I'll present to you tonight is the group has not seen um which is a couple of changes for 1702 and a few changes we've made in response to that position. This is our long list of all of the chapters. I think we had exhibits A through B of these chapters. You know, as we've been talking through the study sections, the goal was a big group of place at the end and we spread out the section to make sure we talk about each chapters individually with the commission breaks. So, we are making amendments to the title purpose authority. We are implementing zoning districts and zoning which references the official zoning map and the new districts. And then we are making a repeal and creating permit chapter for every single permit type 1724. It's entirely the one of the changes that or one of the things we discussed at our last meeting in February of the study session was chapter 72 federal purposing authority where we had a speaker talking to us about the potential effect of this ordinance on active project applications in the city. Um, and the planning commission asked staff to get bring back information on active permits that are incomplete that might be affected by this as well as for staff to look at our neighboring jurisdictions to see if they author that what we were discussing was a sunset clause that was extended beyond the typical 30-day requirement. So, the ordinance is adopted and then takes effect 30 days. Um, so we did do that. The right now the planning commission has about six active incomplete applications that are in the discussion that we were talking about. Um complete applications have a different requirement. Housing invested rights have different requirements but there are about six active applications

at this time. So it could change by the time this is adopted. Five of those are conditional use permit applications and we have one development proposal and conditional openness. This is the applicant who we've been discussing the concerns. Um so the procedures amendments are again for clarity and uh while we are proposing some change to ministerial action none of these items these applications would be kind of downgraded and so they're essentially the same processes that are currently in place are going to the chapters but it is technically true that the new processes and procedures would affect these applications but it's kind of move the door back against the procedures are nearly the same but as we talked about in February the real effect of describing the policy foundation between the general plan and makes use it's not this stuff we also looked into our new learning jurisdictions um and all of them essentially do one of the following things when they adopted the ordinance they either specifically state that a project must comply with the amended ordinance. So, if it's not complete, which is what we have with every day and then uh it's effective and then it must comply or they don't include a specific requirement which means that a project would be required to comply. If it doesn't offer that sunset, doesn't offer an extended period of time, an ordinance is effective, that means it's a um we also found that our neighborista is actually even more restrictive. Um not only does application uh you know if it's incomplete you need to comply but even if an applicant is complete and not in compliance they have to start their construction of their

approved project or their complete project within one year or the new ordinance applies if they feel right um so what we proposing we we're not proposing a change from the February draft we're proposing the 30-day effective date and it would comply or incomplete projects would be subject to the new ordinance. Um because our neighbors didn't have something different. Um and it's a standard practice in the city of polic or authentic occlusions or they apply to vehicle requirements license in the city of so we did uh do the research already is requested but staff is not recommending it. We also are proposing a slight change to site architectural review which I believe was reviewed in the go back with me all the way to I think September study session. Um but one of the requirements that was coming from HTV for our housing element um review was to update the discretionary findings that we have for site and architectural design review. And so we're proposing some amendments that are in the traffic for site architecture review that and split out residential projects, commercial projects, housing relevant sites, make sure that it means no net loss findings where appropriate and which findings apply to specific design projects. So that is a change from the original chapter you saw at study session. And with that, this ordinance like the others has been prepared consistent with the general pattern housing element, but it is exact category by section 15 through 78 as it's just a policy change. It doesn't have to go back to that. And with that, this ordinance again, the

repeal and replace title 74 17.4, excuse me, is about clarifying our permitting requirements. We have some proposals for administrative reviews of smaller projects and we're also in this adopting the ministerial review and the um reasonable accommodations chapters you saw out of the last study session which is similar as well the planning commission authorization please do we have questions from the commission No, we'll go ahead and open the public hearing at 9:22 p.m. Do we have any public comments on this item? I should say for this item for the previous two items, Christopher written comment. This letter applies to all items and not Thank you.

Yes. And I have them on mine as well. Chris Po.

Hi again. Chris Pedo, 1011, Commino Delmare, San Diego. Um, and I was at the planning commission meeting on February 26. Um, when this was discussed in the sunset provision and the request to look at the neighboring communities. We saw the staff report. Uh, we pre prepared and presented some language that could be used as sunset provision as part of the letter that we sent on the 23rd. So, at this point, we're requesting that the planning commission choose the option to amend uh make amendments to your recommendation to the city council and not accept the language as presented. Section 17.02030 conformity required. Please direct staff to add a sentence before after text in E1 that states, "All land use permit and subdivision applications that have been determined by the community development department to be incomplete before the effective date of the zoning ordinance or an amendment will be processed in compliance with requirements in effect when the application was submitted, provided that the application is deemed complete processing within 180 days after the effective date of this zoning ordinance." Um, I also I'm going to go out of sequence here a little bit, but the the 30-day review period that's been referenced and was referenced on the February 26 is a little bit of a of a misnomer. So, we're complying with the permit streamlining act, which means we file an application. The city has 30 days to respond within that 30 day. After that 30 days, we then have to make revisions, resubmit. City has another 30 days to review. We get correction items. We make those. Then the city has another 30 days we make corrections and it can go on and on and on. We are making best efforts to try and comply with everything. I can tell you in the I don't know 15page incomplete letter that we received a couple of the comments uh require massive changes to the plan which require all um supporting

documents to be amended and it takes a lot of time. It's not something where we submit and it could be reviewed in 30 days. Uh, additionally in some jurisdictions, planning commission has directed staff to look at the project for even a review within a certain period of time and sometimes that's done under the guise of an advisory committee. But there's no guarantee even if we submit what we think is a complete package that it'll be reviewed in 30 days and we may have to go through a variance. So we strongly sec suggest and recommend adding some sunset provision language to this case. Um I do not fully understand um the statement that the amendment will not have meaningful effect on current active applications. the design guidelines that are part of the items that you guys are here reviewing and making recommendation would have significant impacts and if we had to comply with these new requirements project would be completely different and I've notice I've identified these before LU8.8 8 requires a three-story building. LU8.7 rear parking LU8.1 commercial use on a ground floor. Plus, we have all of the kinds of requirements that are embedded in here, which is why the request to zone this to general commercial all places, as Eva stated, if that's the direction and the will of the planning commission, it needs to be identified in a lot of items and it can be addressed via a text amendment, which is a much simpler process in doing this.

Okay. Thank you, Mr. Thank you. We'll go ahead and close the public hearing at 9:26 p.m. Is there further discussion from the commission? question. Um the parcel that the the um there's a couple parcels, but let's do the uh parcel the one that's on for street. What exactly is the project? Um

so the application is a currently a commercial development of Wi-Fi. So it's a mixed use. Okay, that's the application. And it sounds like um us accepting a general plan as moving forward this project will some somehow become void possibly or have to start over.

It's not that the project becomes void. The project would be required to comply with the requirements of the ordinance once it takes effect. the general plan once it takes effect housing element takes effect against the procedures chapters but um that that application the desire as you mentioned on other items as well as as a 100% perission benefits if if we were to grant this a fun or to grandfather this project then are we allowed to do that on a partial bypartial basis or is it or is that it's transferred to the entire city.

No. So you would be amending the enforcement of the procedures chapters against incomplete projects for8 days which you can recommend to the council to add that language. Um but the project would still be reviewed for consistency with the code as it is now or as it is 180 days from effectiveness. And so they're very comp.

Yeah, the conformity was asking it sounds like we can't do it on a partial by partial basis. So I was kind of go before but that's the thing is it becomes hard in class and that's why I just yeah the designs all I understand the purpose um it's just how it's hard to understand what the patient individual

but we better prove it with the generation of X whatever that you all I mean it's all recommended design. No, these are the procedures. Well, um yeah,

and and I would concur with the applicant statement that other items affect theft is project but this particular procedures chapters that the process for additional use permit the process for the process for review. Okay, just just one also affect the map street as well or no person appeals process can probably help um an early appeal processed by the applicant for the commission to consider how special the myion would allow for the post process Yes. And yeah, please. Is there a second?

A second. I'll second. All in favor? I want to oppose.

Abstain. Okay. Motion passes. Item 6.6. Recommendation to the city council for the adoption of objective design standards for multif family residential mixed use development projects in the downtown mixing district. Good evening. Miss Kelly will once again be presenting supported by our place good fellow and the technical assistance from our senior plan Amber Cameron. Again, this is related to the downtown residential and mixed use type projects. Um, it is in response to some state law changes and we're looking to standardize. Good evening, commissioners. Thank you for having me back. I know you've heard so much tonight. as the presentation comes up. I actually I'm actually glad that I'm coming before the now table item 6.1 because I think the objective design standards a little bit more of a smaller topic. It's easier easier to wrap your head around. But what it does do is it reinforces two points. One that no component of the general plan was developed in a vacuum. Everything is spreaded from the very beginning six years ago and builds on policies and the land use maps from that. And of course these are for the downtown mixed use district we've been talking about mixed use. So this opens that discussion up again. The second major topic that is a theme in this meeting and frankly all housing development meetings across the state of California is the idea of local control in the face of state mandate. And this is an example of that and I'll be able to walk you through exactly what that means. I want you to keep that in mind as you think about these other items. this ongoing balance of attempting to maintain global control for the specifics of the community in the face of state mandates and balance these two things which is what staff is really

trying to clear just like staff of every jurisdiction the state of the presentation to come up oh you have cover I was looking for my cover all right once again these are objective design standards multif family and resial takes development without time script. Yes.

Uh once again, the city has drafted these objective design standards. The objective design standards are consistent with state housing laws. I'll get more into that. Um we've met twice before on March 13 from last year. You commented more on a grand approach. We then started the project and sort of types of public outreach. I'll get into that. And then just last one commented on the document the actual statements themselves. I'll get into the project quickly. I'm not going to take your time on a lot of discussion although community outage the content and samples of standards. All right. Once again what are object design standards? In essence they are quantitative design regulation. the California government code that describes them as standards that quote involve will personal or subjective judgment by a public official. Basically, they are similar to the development standards that we're more familiar with. Hype setback, block size, things like that. We need to distill standards or we need to still design into quant quantifiable standards. And the reason we're doing that is to ensure that design becomes a ministerial as opposed to discretionary view. I'll talk about why that is. In other words, let's make design a checklist just like we use a checklist to make sure a project matches zone development standards. In other words, the preventing design give delays ultimately because subjective design view in essence invites discussion. One person's perspective on what quantifies or what qualifies as high quality design may not match another person's. That's why we all have different design tastes. And if you apply that to a housing project, you are going to increase the time it takes for project through. And that as we'll see is inconsistent with state law like so many other housing policies. by the state of California. However, objective design standards can be customized. It doesn't mean we're just

applying numbers across the board to make all housing look the same. They're based on local design priorities and existing conditions are they're based on input. We looked at the 1941 downtown plan was of course written in a very different housing environment when things were subjecting when phrases like let's ensure that all design or that all development in downtown bolsters high quality complements our historic feel what is that does that mean in today's standardized landscape and of course we're looking at those historical resources in downtown and make sure that they are taken care of. So again, as I alluded to, why are why would a city place design guidelines which can be so tailored, so specific, so well written, and so narrative with boring old standards? Well, it is ironically to maintain global control. Just like you may see the housing element and that huge arena number and those massive densities are saying, wait, that's not consistent with us. We're losing control. Well, the fact is if you don't beat that ring number and if you don't adopt these standards, you are going to be something more than that in the uh case of a bet design standards based on state law. Cities up here for the government code section, cities cannot disprove a multif family housing project that includes most residential, including through design review unless the project is shown to be inconsistent with objective quantifiable standards. What that means that no city has to adopt those address. It means that if you don't, you have no control over the design of residents development city because you can't use those design guidelines that so many states have had since the 1960s. You simply can't use them. And so although it may seem strange to adopt these very quantify the standards to something as sensitive as

design, cities have to do or else they all control of residential development express. So I talk about this idea of of that fact this is threaded through this entire process. This was not pulled out of the vacuum just like the downtown mix district itself was not applied in the vacuum. This came out of six years of community outreach. Just like the mixed use district where cities and excuse not cities, the community and stakeholders said, "We need to activate our downtown." Just today I was walking around businesses you would think would be open till 8:00 p.m. close at 2:30. There's just no activity downtown. Mixed development is quantifiably associated to economic development. When you activate the downtown, you bring people there. businesses fail later and it attracts more and more. It's a process. It doesn't happen immediately. There absolutely are challenges with 30 that 30 density per acre per acre threshold. There's no doubt about it. But this is consistent with six years of community outreach. So again, these are in the general plan itself. Action item number 2.4 says develop a set of multiple design standards in mult districts. 21 says develop those standards in those two districts. That discussion came way before this. That's part of that original draft. In the same vein, those design priorities we're talking about were also drafted way early with this discussion. These are postgraable pedestrian experience. We want to require all new developments to provide street safe elements along public frontages. Parking shall be placed to the side and behind new buildings. You don't want your downtown. I'm not saying this. I'm saying this over six years of you. We do not want parking sitting in front of our beautiful assembly street.

New and modified buildings must require them to be cited and designed to reflect the existing layout, architectural style, character, massing out of existing buildings. The OBS you see in front of you is spawn this. Again, all of this is spread through the six-year process just like the downtown district itself. I want to stress again that um design standards do not impact me. They do not impact where housing can be built. That is the general plan. That is the general map. That is the general plan density table that Mr. presented early on. Back to that item system which we'll discuss again. All this does is regulate designs. It regulates design district for multif family and residential business development. See a list of items uh to which these OBS will not apply any non-residential development industrial straight commercial. noninfest sites. This goes to the inner law itself. If indevelop even a very large perfectly suitable mixed use building but off at the agricultural edge with no urban or no built land uses around it. town would still have to go through that traditional uh discretionary design process. wouldn't go that streamline the same build something has to the site have mass impact it was on wetlands or it was damaging or tearing down the register impact or steep land but the idea here is yes we will assume land housing but not housing that made out of environmental impact to the public health or the built environment those are the exceptions um of course just like the general plan Mr. early mentioned tones of outreach events. We have alone. In addition to those, um we heard from you last year that we need to diversify our community

targets as much as we can, use online tools, make sure people can get to this and perform in-person outreach. First example is what we're seeing there is a trifold brochure that we created from our initial scope of work. thinking would be a paper handout that uh staff could distribute that has all the information about what the testing standards are, where it would happen. We realized, you know what, let's also create a QR code on that and make sure we put that onto the city website. Staff and Amber did a great job of keeping the website updated with all these materials. We then put out an online survey at the end of last year and um got responses from, you know, we had questions about how long, where did you live, etc. We got responsibility and long-standing residents. I'm not going to spend too much time on this. I saw my last presentation. People wanted to emphasize again walkability, sidewalks, storefronts, entries, historic feel just keeps coming up again and again. We are not going to score historic by downtown. Uh frontage priorities, landscape priorities, Latino tree coverage. Uh open space. This goes back to what you was saying. I went back and updated our R OS since you last saw it to make sure it's consistent with the meeting zoning uh open state zoning standards and uh things like that. This is all these are all priorities to the community respond to develop. We had a community design workshop. What you're seeing there is the postcard that was sent to 8,000 residents if not more in the community. It was at Gains restaurant which I know you all know of. On December 2nd, we have interactive poster boards and uh staff tables. The poster boards were made with different topics and examples and looked at the design standards and basically give people stickers to say ah this is low priority here priority board. Definitely the guy will include this so we can get um feedback

on the type of things that are important. Um and of course we also set cards. All right. And now let's get into the actual document itself. Um, we heard from you last month a lot of great feedback and I appreciate it when they're now uh integrated into the new slot code final final graph that you see with all the graphics. You wanted us to add more uh strengthen our color building code materials and fencing controls for pivot things like ugly chain fencing and um you know plastic building materials. We wanted to update or and add standards for uh redeveloping historic buildings. I want to stress again. I had said earlier that any um project that's going to impact a designated historic landmark would not be uh uh ODS would not apply to that. So I thought that when I say historic buildings here the way it's laid out in the ODS is there are two historic districts in hall certainly they both overlap you. So we decided one thing we need to do is ensure that any project that uh proposes to develop what's called more walkie talk here a contributing structure to that historic district when those are listed in that paperwork for the historic districts. If you're going to mess with one of those you wanted to lay out standards for what you need to do and what you can and can't do if you're going to leave it all one of those. So since the last uh we added those in we updated the private open space standards um balconies uh private patios on the ground floor and we updated the open space and many requirements again not consistent with what it was just really well. So thank you for your feedback last month. It was all helpful. It was

uh able to be integrated with staff's needs and the document up. All right, the first chapter of the docking is just a classic introduction. Uh just a quick introduction to downtown polar character and it's a relationship to the other regulations. Again, point this is not um this does not change the traditional zoning standards. This does not change the allowed density or the allowable location of development. Um so we laid that out that again it's not going to compact with the general plan map or development code. Um there's a submission and review process for design review which again is different than what people perhaps design board or the planning commission having open discussion about what to that just doesn't exist anymore. house are you consistent with this checklist of syllabus and finally staff asked us in a very good request to add a process for modifying yes which are heard tonight flexibility is important however again this is part of a long range document no long range document can predict variances and no design tastes at all simply can't happen we've heard that you know that the housing element could be impossible to build or everything could change and someone could come in build 8,000 units. Of course, that's that can't be a reason to keep delaying either the objective design standards or anything else. So then all you're doing is creating a wider period for applicants to have applicants that are impacted by these changing standards. So when I write these ODS and I think about them, I'm thinking the quicker they get adopted, the less people impacted by existing uh applications. The second chapter is for these what I call work with doc calls these larger scale multif family and residential listings projects. We separate out or some of the standards the downtown

versus the outer downtown because there are different nuances to right along San versus the outer boundaries of the community map. We have two lines on this map or those historic districts because again we have specific standards for development within those districts. And then uh that chapter is broken into site design pedestrian experience building will inform historic character. Uh most ODS don't have an entire historic character section. It's very clear in hall that the community cares about its historic character. So we wanted to go out some examples architecture space landscape. Uh the second chapter is for smallcale residential. You also need to you may think why did we break this up? The simple fact of the matter is it's really hard to develop design standards that can be applicable to a fourstory mixeduse building or a little duplex. They're just too different to apply uh the same broad set of standards to. So by breaking it out, we were able to tailor the standards to these two sets of of uh project types. Um so this section has a little bit of a different structure. site design oration building historic design private or space landscape and then there's an appendix to this I talk about this idea of industrial development checklist this is not something that all OBS provide it's something we like to provide it's basically a checklist that has every single design standard that's in a document is still into a checklist it allows you to obviously through the applicant you put your name your DPN your project type you can check it And then before you even submit your project, the applicant can go through it and make sure she or he sees that my project to the best of my ability is consistent with these. It removes unpredictability to at least some degree. Obviously there would be some

changes but then staff can go in and do the same thing and both parties can initial again staff can decide how exactly um they would like to see something provide as a foundation for our all right samples and again I just have a couple I know so much the way the reason I've selected these samples since there sort of a difference in approaches for these guidelines this is a standard the new pedestrian connections if somebody is going to go in EMU and develop a large project that takes up an entire city block. I know that sounds crazy to everyone here, but again based on the zoning standards and the density standards you've seen, it is possible. It's very likely entirely almost entirely instible. But that's not the point at this point. The point is to say if it's going to happen, we want to control how it looks. We want to make sure and this is an example of that that pedestrians can still get through that. We don't want a wall of development in our downtown. This is an example standal pedestrian connection. It's hard to see the details, but it's got to have landscaping on sides. It's got to be well lit so that those walking in downtown can come through this big and get over east or the the neighboring block. And this is an example of a figure that is much more sight oriented, flat or bury looking but typical of a sight plan type scene. Very different from this is the standard for sidewalk design in many cases. You can see the figure here is the boring term asometric more 3D where this standard describes how sidewalks in front of private development need to maintain a useful and safe feel. So you've got the frontage zone where applicants uh can add certain amenities. There's another standard of what those amenities are seen and tables. Uh but

then that clearway zone has to be kept open. It's got to be wide enough for ADA movement and things like that. And then you've got that outer zone which means the landscape that a certain type of certain type of tree spacing that directly to the community say look we know maintain our green spaces downtown. And of course it's got numbers associated with there's no phrase such as wide. What does that mean? No, it's got to be that's the nature of an example of of this see I apologize of of respecting historic standards and historic feel downtown is what you're seeing in that in that image is that smaller structure is an illustration of a potential existing historic structure. if somebody is going to come in and create that large mold or a mixeduse housing development right next to it. The idea here is that we don't want a wall a massive wall or volume or shadow right next to a beloved historic district. So what that developer is going to need to do is reduce reduce the mass of that building in the area near the historic district. A developer is going to say that's not going to be easy. No, it's not. The idea here is not to make life easy for developers. is to make use reflective of the community's priorities. And when we go older and older than what's going all the way back to 91 is do not make back our historic. That's an example of how we can do this with the design. Chapter three, a little bit different. I know this is a smaller structures. So we have standards for limiting the visual impact of the garage. If you walk around downtown, I've done lots of walks of this area taking photos. This the most amazing part about you know those outer edge of the unique is that these are not homes with big massive garages and stuff. Many of them don't have garages, which is actually visually very pleasing. So, we wanted to do is make

sure that redevelopment uh aderes to that and that you're not your building doesn't have more than a certain percentage of the front facade taken up by a garage, whether it's on the side facing outward or along those uh rear facing garages. So there's different metrics involved for each historic design here a little different because here in this these smaller scale structures we're not going to see those huge larger buildings next to a small historic standard. It's going to be more scaled correctly. So what we can do is is not not require that the new building be scaled. What we can do is require the new building to include elements that are consistent with the neighbor building. uh the roof pitch is within 10 degrees of the adjacent roof pitch. That's the first part. Historical articulation such as sight lines, cone boards, cladding patterns and floor level separation shall match the direction and alignment of the adjacent historic building. So there are ways we can quantify approaches to historic design just to at least make things feel like they match and are not going um in conflict with historic structure. Um here we are again next steps before public comment on the US tonight commission to recommend the council or not to adopt and then we'll take this again like all these other things any questions thank you if not let's go ahead and open the public hearing at 9:54 And that do we have other comments?

Yes, we have question real quick. I just have I might have missed it, but how does staff decide what's a historic building and what's just older? Um because you could have an empty site, both buildings are essentially the same age. One maybe has beautiful character and great value, the other one sucks.

And we've seen in the past, not in historic areas, but when a commercial building burns down and then it comes back for site architectural, planning commissions try and decide, oh, we want this building to match with the new Walgreens. This is the actual example. and they go, "Well, it doesn't actually match with the other buildings in the same complex." And then you have this discussion. So, when it's the commission, I think it makes sense because you actually have the discussion if it's at the staff level, which is good. It's faster. It's just helpful to know like what they're using. Thanks.

That's a great question and I spend so much time that want to answer it. Is everyone do we have the other public comments though? Oh, do we have our public comment? No, we do not have

I think that's an excellent question. Like what does make it old? Because you know I'm a teacher. My students said that I'm born in 1995. Oh my gosh, you're old. So it's if we could close the public comment. Yes. All right. Yes. Let's go ahead and close the public comment at 956. Yeah. That's it is a great question and there are layers of bureaucracy I shouldn't say that way of of political and legislative identification of historic structures and you saw in my earlier slide that housing streamline in in in per state legislation does not apply to a series of project types that are basically the same types of projects that an EI would identify an impact with. They would be in a pro in a wetlands that might, you know, um harm a species. They would be on a fault line. They would be in whatever it is and or they would impact a historic structure that again is part of the SQL, the DI process. So, the state obviously made these consistent with SQA and and cultural impacts. Um the the according to the according to state law that streamlining um uh clause only applies to identified um historic landmarks which is one type of historic um identification. There was only one actual landmark downtown and I'm sorry it's in the it's in the introduction to my to the yes I forget it's

so building so it's actually this building 375th street here city hall um it was the gate library um but we also have the to answer the question it we have the downtown um historic district that was registered on the national register we have the Monterey historic district that's registered on the National register. The historic buildings adjacency or redevelopment requirements of the OES would apply to contributing buildings in those districts and or 375.

And and those contributing structures are identified in the paperwork of those two districts and and the ODS document in the introduction lays out the boundaries of those two districts. And you know, part of what we tried to do here was tailor standards to those districts. are different types of districts. One thing that's difficult is those few districts and again if you look at this paperwork and it's 40 years old on an old PDF that you can't do the search of and handwriting in some places is that they aren't just very buried. There are a lot of beautiful historic districts but they're buildings but they're everything from Gothic to Italianate and so it's difficult to apply a certain required style which some ODS documents do. We talked about this in the last meeting. You know, downtown Santa Barbara is all mission style and our OBS says we want you mission and they lay out what what makes a mission style building here because there's so much variety and that's what makes Hollister so amazing and beautiful and cute down here. What we tried to do instead was and that's it's a standard in OBDS is ask developers to integrate components of different um styles that are in these districts Italian Gothic mission revival and you know you have to make the building look exactly like it but let's make sure you include for example an arched portico windows that are vertically oriented like the old Gothic buildings a gable of a certain height that is indicative of Victorian and things like that. But again, the actual historic standards about adjacency and these are laid out in the Oregon are if you are adjacent to contributing structures of those two historical districts,

but they're only for historic areas. For example, the example we gave Walgreens and it wouldn't it wasn't

so those contributing structures are only in those historic districts. So it's not everywhere in the district that would, you know, that would be quite limiting. And a lot of the a lot of structures in those districts simply aren't historically identifiable by style. And that's the value of having those those that paperwork for those districts is it does identify the ones that can lead you to an actual district. So we have those contributors which say, "Look, if you're right next to one of them, they're valuable in their holster. We do solve through question.

Yeah, I like to mention that. Yeah, it's a little bit complex like as far as apply to historic district and the fact there's all these airplane that's positive low bearing law, right? There's like all these triggered all these regulations. So I mean yeah the hard part is the ministerial to be honest um because it means it's an interpretation of staff um I would argue it kind of creates a little bit strong a stronger separation between the applicant um and the process and I do believe there's got to be there's got to be a lot more that are involved in these processes actually know you can you know I do want to add one more thing because this I've done a lot of DS entirely area there's sort of two branchs of thought with um working with actual developers on these the idea is if you start being influenced by developer feedback your ODS are losing what they're trying to do which is integrate community feedback and community priorities because the developers are going to tell you what makes it easy to build versus what makes design appropriate. to your community and so you need to balance and I absolutely understand the point we've done ODS where we do developer um rounds and talk about these things for the last six years but ultimately what we find is we hear the same thing over and over which is you hear feedback that says okay this will make it easier for us which makes sense but at the same time it ultimately becomes potentially in conflict with what the the spirit of NODS is which is to maintain what's been happening for six years in communities, which is very detailed design guidelines. That's that really lay out

in detail these community priorities and they they set the stage for design committees which most cities had for the last 30 years where they argue over and over and discuss down the minutest detail every component of design. Of course, that meant housing project months and months. To be clear, that's not that's not what I was alluding to. It's like I understand the intention, but the actual application of it um and and this is not even about um opposing developers. Yeah.

It's well, let's put it this way. I mean, downtown, you have vacant lots, you have buildings that are grow they're going unused. There's there's, you know, and I know I talk to property owners downtown. um they would rather sit on those properties rather than absolutely amuse them uh for a whole separate reason. So design standards especially when they intertwine with legislative priorities and bureaucracy right so it's it's well I guess to put it this way state of California and the legis the the the legislative body right the house you ultimately assembly and the senate they can only propose legislation at a high level they they're broad intentionally broad and but when it comes down to the actual like desire for to see the downtown thrive as an example. That requires investors and to a certain extent that requires their their understanding of of the actual implications of these complex you know uh requirements and so we can only really propose even at our level broad policy or broad recommendations. Um are they actually going to work? Is it going to make the downtown worse or better? We can't really say. We can only assume. And granted, you have residents that have their opinion. And I appreciate I obviously I value their opinion because they're in a lot of ways the consumer of the downtown, but that still doesn't change the dynamic of what do we want the downtown be? Do we want to actually thrive? Uh what is it going to take to get there? And uh oh yes, you know, sounds like another layer of potential bureaucracy. I just know the only what I can say to that is you're right. We cannot predict note with all variables what will happen

downtown or what I can say confidence is without the OES a developer could come in and say given this is such a a difficult feas feasibility environment the only way I can make this work is to design my my residential apartment building as a block I can't spend any money on design I cannot add any nice looking windows when I can pull this off is with a simple block mass. I cannot respond to this historic building. I'm sorry. And without the ODS, that developer, you wouldn't be able to respond to that. He he or she would be able to build that building as a raw, you know, a volume mass in the downtown that is, I can absolutely say, out of character with the downtown. But again, it's it's looking at it in reverse. is looking at but what happened if you didn't have the ODS and I saw this not just YouTube I mean this is kind of the nature of this piece the ODS will not guarantee good good design but they absolutely guarantee it's bad design that's the best they can do

I I I struggle with that honestly just because the um and this again it's not helper at all but but they're businesses they're business apolog we we are past 10 so we do have to make a motion to continue. Sorry. Okay. Do you all want I mean really we're we're at we're at the end. We all a motion. Was there a motion to get much? Everybody in favor?

Yeah. I'll just I'll just be I mean anybody's going to invest their goal is to obviously see that investment thrive. They're not going to build a block. No offense. it's just not who's gonna who's going to use that properly. Um, so all I'm saying is and I'm not saying we shouldn't have standards at all. I'm just saying that those standards should have flexibility to be able to make sure that one that there's there's a public engagement of that new process. Um, and then ultimately two that we actually have the intention to see downtown thrive. Um, I think staff agrees with you. That's why they had us add in an amendment process for the standards and that's in the document. You have

different process for mon. Do we have a motion? Okay. I want to adopt u 6.6 recommendation city council adoption standards. Yes. Second. All in favor? All right. Amendment. How can we do we go fields process um for the public the non administrative or at least allow for the folk engagement in that process? Is everyone okay or is your are you okay with that amendment?

I would I would say that ministerial projects by their definition have no deal process. Yes, that's the problem that we've had over the last half months and write an article being written about police. No offense, it's just the reality. I'm going to go ahead and make the motion. I see I see what that OBS is trying to do. So, my motion my motion was just adopt 6.6 as is staff recommendation. Okay, that's your motion. Second and all in favor oppos.

No. Thank you. So now do we go back to our 6.1? Okay, let's go back to our 6.1 and see if there is discussion a motion any feedback I don't know if I needed to recommendation but having like a middle tier mix because some of these projects don't fit into Don't you think that might be or just reduce it down to whatever and still have that doesn't seem to be visit?

So is it okay to um so I think we're going to adopt it but we're going to ask for um considerations early and I think there was several of them. So one is your proposing is the mixed use ask that specific do you want to recommend like to agree on number one I just want to clarify a we cannot bring down the 30 acres sorry 30 dwelling units per acre because otherwise if we do that correct I'm wrong. It'll will have will be non-compliant with the law. Is that correct?

It will have an effect on how it could be. But it's going to city council regardless. We are not going to decide either way. Like this is what we're we heard from the public. This is a big big one and and for us to put it forward is what we're committed commercial use and that it forces them to have to look for different sites but

but uh the mix used the state took those numbers into consideration when we send an adult. So in other words, the state was looked a look that arsenal over there. That's the new excuse. Now we're saying oh never mind it's not it's just going to be commercial. I don't think you guys are understanding and I'm not sure but but once you know we have to then look for new sites I mean that's yeah

when I first we're not it's not our duty to represent the state of California it's our to that means It's your I sent my piece. It's on you guys. The commission would do this. No, no, it's your motion, right? No. Okay.

It's okay to say I mean this is why we're here, right? So, I want us to feel okay with expressing or you're representing your opinion of what you see. It's okay. We are. It's okay. ratio. How much how many um units did you have to work with? Because we're already at 8,000 I think like I think what the state demand is like 4,000 correct for Colorado. And you're saying that we are u at 3,000.

We are at 8,000 something, but it it's a much smaller buffer on their affordability. um I wouldn't be able to calculate that but I can tell you that a significant number of sites are mixed fields and there's wiggle room on correct for some sites and it's all like yeah what I'm what I'm just suggesting is like I I totally get the projects that are in the pipeline that one uh what was it like buy a Starbucks over there like that project I'm I'm buy so like like it's in 500 scale. Oh, 051 020. Correct. 05.

Yeah. I'm not against stuff like that on a case by case basis, but to just throw it out and say you got to start all over. No, like it's just it's six years or not six years, three years. Would that be your your be your revision to have for the city council to have consideration for projects already in the pipeline? correct to not be impacted by correct I think we all but I also think we should make recommendations that let the council consider an amendment process yes we just need more flexibility I don't see how it's not going to

again we're just giving them our recommendations and they're going to do whatever they're going to do I I understand I just think both records they're all yes for the mixed use. I think that's a big mistake because I think we were all up here, but I think pushing for the mixed use. Yeah, I'm just confused like the back 30 people. That's it. It's not quantity. Quantity for 30. Yeah.

And and you're forcing like someone is building a storm put houses in like that's a little bit extreme. You have to put a more creative way to distribute the students. they are right now right now there's like you know there formulas for use but you know we're skate with there's a lot of home there's a lot of space so there's flexibility there where other there's like deserts where it's just housed and there's no commercial so there's other ways out but I think the easiest route right now would be to keep certain project on project just to reduce to whatever project in the pipeline or project and that we want to consider future because this is going to be effect

or 2031 for the this is only the housing cycle right and this is the general plan so it'll go till 2040 it covers but the housing element is only going correct so we're looking at these bigger these amendments also just want to say we're going to be back to you before you know by the time this gets certified it'll be the eight years commitment to keep for six years like like

the state's going to look at like what's going on like like pipeline I'm bumping that it's hard to reiterate that but just realize too commissioner that this issue is not unique to 70 or this is happening all across the state issues you know I mean the gentleman that spoke you presented on the reality that other communities carell specifically perfect example they're like up in arms because they're being forced to build outside of their own capacity you literally have to tear tear up commercial properties to do what the what the state wants you to do. Bottom line is I think they created a problem and and this is a statewide problem and it's only going to get worse because ultimately we you know we have too many municipalities say oh let's just lay down it says

in our in our in our revision is if you all consider so several people including uh the gentleman talked about his two parcels I think we by McDonald's and then another person that asked about their three parcels to be designated high density to medium density. Like there's different people who are impacted, but they could we put something in the for consideration for city council to give them a path to Yeah, you absolutely can

um propose to the council a land use like we the commission wants things the council should consider changing land use. I will if I may chair and it's it's wholly up to you as the chair but I have been informed that we've had a couple people submit a request for comment waiting so I think with the right we could reopen we have already had the public comment but I was told we had a couple people are you all okay with that meeting okay yes let's go ahead and open another comment 107 okay I have Victoria Montoya wanting to speak to Okay,

good evening. My name is Victoria Monto and I'm here just for registered voter and what I have seen tonight is incredible. I don't know how you guys manage to think and answer because this should have been a two session thing. initially invited because there's some of us that could want to understand what's going on with is it winning and more housing whether it's a state or a battle or whatever we need to deal better things than just houses my concern I live near the water sewers okay and when you're talking about how much the state wants should do and how much the county wants and how many people are ready to buy and sell our houses. My concern is you can do all the talking and walking, but what are we going to do about the water and the sewer in this county? I live where it stinks. And if all these developments are going to bring their water from both, you know what? I have to live with that. So if you have sessions like this, you have to make a two sessions. So the people that live near where it's not fancy we get the whatever you we call it I call it the west side which is was changed when it was called bonita the area was called bonita

whatever

okay so I'm here to say we need to deal with the water in the sewer and then we can say yeah we can have all these houses in our county historically and nonhistorical. Plus, the schools high school is overcrowded because the land was given. But we sure need to increase that there is a need for another high school. Why keep it in one area? Because it was the land was free, but it doesn't help the county. It doesn't help the environment and the kids are all pushed in and out. So I am I don't even have little kids anymore. But I think that we better think better of you cannot give our homes unless you have safety water and safety sewer and not put all the out there in the back. I'm sorry, but I got tired because this is a two session meeting that I wanted to learn from to push everything in one thing and then tell us. No, I I thought you were all developers when you understand what what went on there. I don't think none of you guys are developers or real estate. You understand what just happened tonight? Everything was shoved down in one night. I think we can do better.

Good night. Thank you. Thank you for being here. Um, okay. So, do we have a motion or what? Oh, I'm sorry. Close public. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, 10:21. Okay. I think that uh commission made a motion with the recommendation right and reducing the numbers excluding the properties sorry and excluding the properties that that are really impacted currently

and accounting for public benefit options where they grow in like that that's why I would argue some of these properties should be designed to have that commercial um because ultimate economic developments very revenue offset infrastructure costs that we need to get this

thank you very much flexibility with it use and so they're able to provide also for if we're going to adopt the housing unit. I mean, I don't have the exact numbers, but in in short, yes, absolutely. Yes. So, we would have to look into our industrial areas to change them to housing.

Okay. But just making sure the people impacted will be able to worsen like for them to have some kind of way to appeal or not the impact is okay. We just have designated just so that we have the to not a developer but I always think it's harder to build in a smaller area. I mean I I think technically the potential citizens to consider downtown since downtown already has taller buildings technically they're they have more of an infrastructure but obviously dual some kind of potential requirements with by historic district but to to the point of the gentleman in the back you know

I got a math question for you 10 but you got to stop and think just for a second math deal. You say you drop it from 30 to 20. That's 10 units. Do you have 100 acres that you're talking about high density in this plant? That's that's the question you should be asking. How many acres are are are designated towards high density? 30 30 to the acre. You can do the math yourself up the eight path

regardless. Yeah, it's where where are they going to try to meet these numbers? I mean these are all hypothetical numbers take either way right it's not the city it's regardless if you want to change the math around right it's like I think Sacramento is probably the best numbers around right and still have the same outcome so if needing to move numbers around fine but all I'm saying is the things that are actually in the actually trying to produce how we create some solutions and at the same time create potential uh amendment process to make sure that We're slow walking this into something that's not going to distort.

Agreed. Slow walking. And then the the final your consideration is the maps if we can once they go city council have the the street name. Is that okay? At least one of them. Yes. Thank you. So, there's a motion on the floor and I want to make sure I captured it um from Commissioner Perez uh to recommend to the council approval of the general plan with a the reduction in the density of the mixed use zoning districts from 30 to 20.

Motion open. Uh can you repeat that? I guess maybe maybe we can just say that's withdrawn there. It it was stated as a motion origin discussing something that's withdrawn forward because you said medium density right which I believe is correct. Yeah, I started with considering maybe introducing another option for mix medium density

instead of follow and then that would be again it would make a lot of changes to the general plan. So I think the best right now is to add varian if they need and also individual. Is that a motion? Yes. Okay, that's the motion. repeat. Yes. So, approve with

approve with recommendation to city council to grandfather and indigenous applications and um provide amendment option for variances for applicants who cannot reach their 30 minimum use. No, that would be I'll second. I will second. All in favor?

I Anyone oppose? No. Okay. Abstain. Motion carries. Going to city council. And there is there any uh reports from commission 8.1? No. All right. And then planning division reports. Staff, do we have any reports? I have nothing. All right, I think we're good. We're journeying at 10:27. I'm going to use this thing to Thank you, everybody.