Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Welcome to the regular meeting of the Larkspur Planning Commission on Tuesday, March 10th, 2026, with our new time of 6.30 p.m. So, can we have a roll call, please?

Okay.

Commissioner Hull. Here. Commissioner Chalmers. Here. Commissioner Wagstaff. Here. Vice Chair Campbell.

Here.

Chair Swisher.

I am here. We have a quorum. Excellent. All right. Next item is public comment on matters that are not on the agenda. Do we have any matters that the public would like to address that are not on the agenda? Anybody here? Nope. Anybody on Zoom?

If you're on Zoom and you want to comment on something not on the agenda, please raise your hand.

All right. Then we'll move on to the community development director's report.

Nothing to report this evening.

Oh, wait, I take it back. We had a successful meet and greet with developers on Thursday last week. I should probably touch on that because that's something new from I announced it at the last meeting. Yeah, it's on. And we had about 11 meetings. Different developers, contractors come. We held the event in this room and we got a lot of good feedback from everybody and got to know everyone on a first name basis, talk about different things going on in the community. So that was successful. And we are now open. The permit center is now open on Thursday mornings from 9 a.m. to noon, in addition to all day Monday and Wednesday. So that's a new addition as of this week.

That's great, thank you. All right, thank you. All right, then we'll move on to item four, which is public hearings. And the first on the agenda is 501 via Casitas, APN 022080-06. Chad Reynoso is the applicant, Sequoia Living owner. R3 residential district zoning project. All right, this is a public hearing request for a design review to permit an accessory structure larger than 400 square feet a slope use permit to permit 126 cubic yards of cut and fill to create a level area to install the proposed site improvements and a fence height exception to permit the construction of an eight foot chain link fence where a height limit of six feet is allowed do we have a report please yes just a moment to turn this up

Okay. Good evening, commissioners. The item before you is PLN 25-045 for 501 Via Casitas. It's also known as the Tamalpais. It's located in Greenbridge, just north of the Corto Madera Creek. The overhead shot there is on the left for you. And then the general location of the proposed improvement, I've pulled a street view map or a street view from Google for you, and it's on the right. So the project proposes to cut into the hillside to create a level platform, which would contain a new fuel cell and condensing unit, which would provide power to the Tamil Pius in order to construct it as proposed. It requires you to approve design review, a slope use permit, and a fence height exception. Here on the left is a site plan for you. This darker ring is going to be the retaining wall that they will create. And then this darker rectangle in the rear is the condenser unit, and the proposed fuel cell is this sort of lighter rectangle that you can see here. And here are some of the pertinent plans. On the left is kind of a section diagram showing But where they will cut into the hillside and where they will fill on the hillside on the bottom to create this level platform. The image on the top is the area where the fuel cell would be. So that's where they're cutting into it. And then the condensers on this portion that is proposed to be raised with the fill. The chain link fence, which I'll get into in just a little bit, just another moment, is shown in the top right corner. And then the bottom right is an elevation drawing of the fuel cell itself. And as the Commission is likely aware, a slope use permit is triggered when a property with a slope greater than 25% poses more than 25 cubic yards of grading. In this case, the project proposes 37 cubic yards of cut, 99 cubic yards of fill. So a total of 61 cubic yards of fill will be brought into the site in order to accomplish that. And then a snippet of the grading plan is shown there on the left for you, which might be hard to read at this distance.

So I'm sorry, 120. Where does the 126 cubic yards come from?

Yeah, total. Oh, total. I see. Got it. OK, 90 plus 30. That's 126. Got it. I'm good at math. OK. And so the last entitlement here is the fence height exception. I think we're all aware again that fences generally are limited to six feet in height total. And in this case, when a fence is proposed on top of a retaining wall or within a foot of a retaining wall, the height of the retaining wall is included in the total height of the fence. So in this case, even though the chain link fence is not As it notes in the staff report, 13 feet tall. It's the total height, including the retaining wall. So at the highest point, the fence would be 13 feet, 10 inches. At its lowest point, it would be six feet, seven inches. And again, this is a chain link fence. And as I noted in the staff report and in the conditions of approval, there is a condition of approval number nine that if the commission agrees, would require the applicant to replace the proposed chain link fence with a fence that's a higher quality, more aesthetically pleasing choice, like a metal mesh fencing or steel mesh panels, something that would look a little better than the chain link that's currently proposed. Mm-hmm. You've received no public comments, no written public comments on this item so far. So staff recommends that you hold a public hearing, consider any public testimony, discuss and approve the project subject to findings, conditions of approval, and a Class 1 CEQA exemption. And that concludes my report. And I believe the applicant is joining us on Zoom if you have questions for that.

Great. All right. Let's hear from the applicant.

All right, I'm going to allow Cletus Blum to talk if he wants to speak at all.

Okay, can you hear me now?

Yes.

Thank you. So I am with Rubicon Professional Services. We are the applicant, the designer, and the contractor to do this work. Chad is somebody on our team who had done the submittal, but he's not here tonight. So we are asking to do this project. We're replacing an existing gas powered generator that is less efficient and older and near its end of life with this fuel cell, which is a chemical reaction fuel cell, which takes natural gas and can produce both electricity and hot water, both of which will be continuously provided to the building. Do you have any questions for me about these, I guess these three items that are being considered?

Sure, Natasha.

Are you removing any of the trees that's on the property to make room for this?

No. If we look, I don't know if we can show the site plan We are in a location where they're in between the larger trees.

Okay.

And I did actually have a question about the location, but I don't know whether that's part of maybe a discussion later, but I don't know if it's a good question, but just more of a suggestion. So I'm wondering if I just hold it until.

Okay, well, does anybody have any other questions? I had a question. You heard the issue about the chain link fence. Have you considered putting a nicer fence and a chain link fence in?

Yes, we're perfectly open to that. We understand that that's an aesthetic value there. That was our standard design. That's why that's a chain link fence in there. We're certainly willing to look at options beyond that. Great. Thank you.

I guess I'll ask it. And I want to make sure I'm reading the map correctly that was provided, the plan showing where the site is. But when I drove up the street, I assumed that the site's going to be immediately to the left on that slope that runs alongside the road. And I was curious... why you didn't want to locate it further down the street near the parking lot, in between the building and the parking lot, because it's more out of the way, more hidden. And it's flatter in that location. It doesn't seem to be as steep. And also it seems like it's less visible from the street and also from the residences across the street.

right so originally the plan was to make it as close to the building as possible the reason being that we'd have to disturb less ground to run utilities gas electric water so that we would have less impact there and it'd be easier for us to connect to the building so the closer to the building generally the better We chose this location where we are now because of a couple of reasons. One, it's the flattest area that's close to the building. We could go down further, but that means that we're digging more of the ground up. And the second reason being that area is good access for maintenance or service of the fuel cell, which we can do right from the street. If we had to do it from further in and we had to use any matter of equipment, we'd have to actually grind up and somehow get into the property closer to the building. Does that answer your question?

Kind of. I mean, I still think there's an area that runs right next to the parking lot where you could access it from the parking lot. But you've answered my question, and I guess I'll wait to see what the other commissioners say, and we can talk about it then.

Thank you. Okay. Sure.

No, I don't have any other questions. You guys?

I think I'll wait to see if there are any public comments about it.

OK, great. All right. Seeing any other questions, none. Are there any comments from the public anybody would like to weigh in here?

If you're on Zoom and you want to comment, please raise your hand. No hands raised.

All right. Then I will bring it back to the commission. Why don't we start on the right? Wait, one more one.

Yeah, I think we do have one here. Okay. So the zoom named H E A L T Hilt should be able to unmute themselves and speak. You're still muted. I think on the phone if you're dialing in, it's star six. Otherwise, it should be a command at the bottom left of the Zoom screen if you're on a computer. there's a member of the public with their hand raised but they're so far have not unmuted themselves okay i think it's an accident possibly an accident all right well uh speak now or forever hold your peace

Okay. All right. How about we bring it back to the commission?

I think they just unmuted themselves.

Okay.

We still cannot hear you speak if you are speaking now.

One second, okay?

Yes, now we can hear you. Thank you.

There you go. Can you hear me?

Yes.

One second, okay? One second. My hope is... that there will be, and I appreciate all your work. My hope is that you will have a fence that hides the fuel cells and fans so that it's not an eyesore in the street.

Okay. Thanks for your good work. Thank you for commenting. All right.

Good. Adding to what that person said, I didn't see any proposal for planting.

One second. I sent the applicant away, but they're coming back.

Anyway, sorry, continue. Anyway, maybe I missed it, but I didn't see any.

No, I didn't see any either.

And I think there are ways to mitigate the impact by...

some sort of planting at least in in that area yeah and making it right okay that's a good any other comments yeah i agree um i'm looking at section b uh which is like on the downhill side kind of and there's going to be you know eight feet or seven feet of retaining wall and then a six foot fence on top of it so That seems, I mean, I guess my thoughts are I'm all in favor of emergency preparedness, right? I don't think we should be making it so people can't do that. But that's 12 feet of wall and fence. So if you could screen it somehow, that would be nice. Or I think like we did on the, we recommended or we talked about on the pump station,

project a while ago like some sort of finish on the on the wall yeah that would make it look a little bit better okay maybe maybe to prevent vandalism graffiti whatever that yeah graffiti or you could you could also have a planter yeah yeah so you would the wall wouldn't be the full height that would be poplar trees well one i guess one issue just to play sort of

I'm just sort of thinking about it. I walk by this sill all the time, and it's pretty dry in the summer, and I don't know that there's any irrigation down there, so it might be difficult to run irrigation there.

The fire department may also, if I can interject, the fire department may also prevent them from planting anything within five feet of that structure with their zone zero requirements.

Yeah, but you could plant downhill from it so that people from down below could look up and see greenery instead of a fence and a wall.

Or a more aesthetically pleasing initial wall.

Yeah, it looks kind of like the Berlin Wall right now. Was the Berlin Wall.

Right. So I think I alluded to what I was thinking earlier. I mean, I think we're all thinking that we don't want it to be an unattractive block by the road. And there are residential units on the other side that are looking right at it. Commissioner Swisher is telling me that if we move it further down and toward next to the parking lot, that's going to be an engineering issue. I'd like to hear actually to see if that, what are you showing me? Right there.

Yeah, right here.

Because then it's not visible at all from the street and you can still access it. But I understand it's going to be more further away from the building and

I think that parking lot or that flatter area down there, maybe correct me if I'm wrong, was identified on our housing element as a potential site for... Oh, is that true?

That portion of the property is a housing inventory site.

Okay, so we couldn't move it down there anyway?

Okay.

And I'm not an engineer, so I can't really comment on whether that does make it prohibitively expensive or not possible.

I mean... You are, though. Yeah, I mean, you can build retaining walls. Yeah. Wherever. Oh, you can. Engineering-wise, right? A steeper slope is going to be more expensive.

But then if it was further down near the parking lot right here, it's less of a concern what the fencing is.

For sure. But I guess what I was getting at is if that parking lot or flatter area was ever developed with residential units or something, then it would be really hard to maintain or to access this facility. I mean, potentially you could set it farther back from the road, but I think what the applicant was saying too is that they need some type of road to be able to get a truck in there to service it.

So right now they can just put it right next to the parking lot, but... I don't know. I think it could be really unattractive. So there would either need to be a really, I guess, something that's not so unappealing as a fence that's around it, or we move it further away, is what I'm thinking. Awesome.

Other than screening it, my thought was just that it needed to have better screening of like plants or like what we did with the pump station. But I didn't have an issue with where it was proposed with the idea that it's probably the most cost effective least impact. And, you know, hopefully they can make it look better by hiding it.

Can we hear? Should we hear from the applicants?

Yeah, we can hear from them.

In fact, can we hear from the applicant on what they can do to make it more attractive and or put it further like next to the parking lot and whether that's even feasible?

Sure. Thanks for that question. I think we addressed the reason why we want to keep it closer to the building. That's just a longer run for us. And once we get closer to the parking lot, I don't know that we can, well, access it from the parking lot. We have to figure out where that access would be for service and repair or anything that, or maintenance that goes on with it. For the second part of that, which is better screening, make it more attractive. Alex, can you bring up a site plan like CO5, sheet CO5?

Yes, just a second.

You can see there that where the cooling module is, the condenser, there's 22 feet from the basically the roadway to the wall. And we have existing trees that are on site. We can certainly put a tree or a shrubbery or some kind of green cover in that space. I think that then that's the highest wall that exists and sort of the most offensive if we want to look at it that way. Again, if the fire department prohibits that, maybe there's some lower shrub we can grow there. I don't know what the fire department will allow. But certainly, we're amenable to putting some greenery in there to better buffer the view.

Or paint the wall with a mural or something.

Sure. I don't know what kind of public art we're looking for, but.

Yeah. OK. All right. Well, can we, any questions, more questions? All right, well, let's start with you.

I can make the findings.

Natasha?

I mean, I would make the findings subject to some, I guess, more concrete screening ideas or moving the location.

Brock?

Yeah, I can make the findings, and I think I'm pretty confident that they can, by either stepping down some part of it and or mitigating it with landscaping and or moving some earth around a little bit, can make it work. But I think the location probably works better than further down, and particularly if we're thinking about having something else down there in terms of housing. Yeah.

Ian? Yeah, I didn't have an issue with the location for the reason that Brock just mentioned, but I would, I think, appreciate some sort of, I think a nicer fence is a great idea, and I'd be in favor of that. And then some kind of vegetation screening or aesthetically pleasing finish on the wall would be would go a long way. So I can make the findings with those conditions.

And I agree with that. I think that location is going to be subject to engineering. I mean, you have to make a run for trenching for the electrical, like you say, the gas, the water, and servicing. If you did put it further down, you're going to be trenching through trees that are existing there. And I think probably it's not economically feasible for you guys to be trenching. It looks like 600 feet or something like that to the, to the place. So I can make the finding as it is with the condition that you do do some aesthetic, um, work on making the fencing more attractive and not looking like a, um, industrial site and, um,

So can they work with the city on that? Is that how we would word that, that they would work with you? Or do we need to be more precise? Like, what do you want?

It would certainly help for it to be more precise. I mean, the condition of approval about the fencing, if there's a particular type that you would prefer, and then if we're talking about a tree or some tree. Right.

I was just going to see if they could bring back that to the commission just so that we could see what they have in mind.

Yeah. If you have guidance. I mean, the type of fencing that would look nice would be like square metal type fencing, not chain link, you know, like, you know, that, like, you know, core stand type fencing. iron or something like that with the rods and you know tubular yeah or yeah rod island tubular steer or something like that that just is more attractive and then the the wall may be brick faced as opposed to just cinder block something like that and if you could bring back a design thing i think that'd be great and also some thought to landscaping landscaping yeah and maybe they can check with the fire department what is permitted and what's not permitted yeah

Sure. So from what I'm hearing, we would like to continue this to your April.

Well, we'd like to see a better design for that aesthetically, because the issue is Natasha brings up a really good point. There are neighbors on the other side who are going to be looking at something that looks very industrial. And I mean, given the fact that your site location is, you know, pretty fixed, probably based upon the engineering that you want to make it as aesthetically pleasing as possible.

So I've got one other comment, maybe for the applicant. In terms of the cooling module, which just seems to be the area where the retaining wall is the highest and therefore fences the tallest off the existing ground, how tall is that piece of equipment?

I'll have to look that up.

Yeah, it looks like it's maybe, I was just, I'm just curious, and maybe we can address this when, as we continue it. So topic for further discussion, but I was just curious, you know, if that's five feet tall, we could also consider reducing the fence height in that area to sort of.

of reduce the overall impact a little bit but if it's six feet tall then there's some element i'm sure of security too because i noticed that on the top of the fence you have an outward barber barbed wire kind of thing because you don't want people to be crawling into a fuel cell no and that's very fair uh but if it's on top of a 10 or 8 foot retaining wall yeah maybe it's less of a security concern just a thought uh for for next time okay so somebody want to make a motion to Brock, do you want to make a motion?

I would move that 501 via Casitas PLN 2545 be put forward to meeting a time undetermined. I mean, depending on what they do.

Well, as soon as possible, I think it'd be good because it's not going to take a long time for us to debate this. So I don't want to make it unfair for them and put too much undue burden on them because they need to move on.

How much time do they need?

The applicant could probably tell us how soon they think they can provide that information.

Yeah, tell them.

I have to unmute him again. Am I on? Yeah, you are. Now I'm back. Yeah, we can respond very quickly to this. We'll have something by next week. Great. So maybe to the next meeting?

To the next meeting, yeah. And I can second.

Do we need to go to another meeting? I guess that's when everybody gets together too.

Yeah, I think that ideally in the best of all possible worlds, we'd like to see a little bit more effort into the design of it because, again, it is the aesthetic thing which is going to be impacting your neighbors the most. No issues with the engineering or the fill or anything else like that. It's just making sure that aesthetically it does not look like something industrial.

Understood. Yep.

Yep.

Okay. I'm going to Google. Yes, Commissioner Hull.

Yes.

Commissioner Chalmers. Yes. Commissioner Wagstaff. Yes. Vice Chair Campbell. Yes. And Chair Swisher. Yes. The motion passes five yeses.

Thank you for presenting.

Of course. Thank you. Appreciate that.

All right.

Next item.

Is 220 lower via Casitas, APN 022-153-19, Bartlett Tree Service Applicant, Casitas of Larkspur owner, R3 Residential Zoning District, Project HTR 26-004. This is a public hearing request for a heritage tree removal permit to remove a coast live oak with a circumference of 141 inches. Do we have staff report?

Yes, just a second.

Yeah, so the item before you is heritage tree removal 26-004 for 220 Lower Villa Casitas, as you've just mentioned. The project is in the vicinity of the one we just discussed. Here's the overhead shot there for you on the left, and then I was able to get a street view photo of the tree itself on the right there. So the project requests the Planning Commission's approval to remove a heritage tree with 141 inch circumference. It's a live oak tree as we've heard. Per the provided arborist report, the tree exhibits a canopy imbalance, recent limb failure, evidence of decay on major structural limbs and at the base of the tree, and a bleeding canker with evidence of thora pathogen. I'm sure the arborist can correct me on the pronunciation of that one. So staff initially approved the removal request and noticed the property and neighbors within 300 feet. And part of the municipal code, there is a 15-day protest period. We did hear from a neighbor who did want to protest the removal, which then requires the Planning Commission to review the item and make a decision on it. The protest cites that the canopy imbalance can be addressed through pruning. the pathogen that was identified was only noted as a suspicion, and that the oak provides aesthetic, environmental, and community value. You've received one comment on this. It is from the person who submitted the protest, again, citing their opposition, and that the canopy health looks improved, and the tree is on the HOA's logo, and just reiterating the fact that it is a community benefit. So staff recommends that the commission hold a public hearing, consider public testimony, discuss an approval request to remove the tree. And that concludes my report. Thank you. And I believe the arborist and the applicant are on the call as well.

All right. Can we hear from the applicant, please?

Okay. I'm going to allow Eric Barnum to speak. You should be able to unmute.

Hello, can everyone hear me? Yes. Thank you all. I would like to point out that the picture that you showed is not particularly current. That picture is, the tree is absolutely gorgeous. But currently, in some of the last storms, about a third of the trees split off. It's got a very large wound on one side. It's split, and you can kind of see the decay going in. So it's not really the current condition of the tree. There's a few items of note. So the Phytophthora canker, We could test for it if you did want us to. If it's Sudden Oak Death, which is Phytophthora, then it's pretty difficult to culture, but you can tell that it's the genus pretty easily. And then some of the larger limbs just have a lot of decay in them, and those go over the building, and there's also decay at the base, which is... The photo I provided in my Argus reports, sort of a little bit better of an example of it, but the decay at the base is on the opposite side of the house or the structure, which is now, let's see, can you go to the photo one? Yeah. So photo one kind of shows that, that large break there. So it's, it's definitely deteriorated as far as aesthetics go and it makes it so about two thirds of the canopy is weighted towards the structure. And then if you can go down to photo three. yeah three is the item i'm most concerned about so there's a lot of decay in that section kind of between two major roots um it looks like that section died off it could have been a root in the past but it's probably decayed and because that's in the side that's directly opposite the structure which is now the side that has all of the weight on it i'm a little bit concerned about If there were to go, it's definitely going towards the structure, and it's now a little bit more likely to go because of the change in weight to it.

Just for fairness, I was going to say, I took a picture this afternoon. If anyone didn't see it, I just, you went and saw it.

Yeah, everyone saw it. Okay.

Okay. Any other comments from the applicant? Okay. Any questions on applicant's comments?

Is there anybody else?

Yeah. Well, I know we have public comment in a second, but I just want, if the applicant's finished, if we have any questions for the applicant, no, then public comment.

Eric, is there anything else you'd want to mention, or is there anybody else associated with the project that wants to speak before we move on? I think the advocate has just raised their hand. Casey Hartel should be able to unmute and speak. You're unmuted, but we can't hear you if you are speaking.

How about now?

Now we can hear you.

Okay, thank you. Thank you all. So my name is Casey Hartel and I have the pleasure of managing the Casitas of Larkspur Association as I have the pleasure of managing other communities in that area. So I would like to say that the board of the HOA did do their due diligence. They had two arborist reports. And it's heartbreaking to everyone that this tree is just, it's sick. It's not sustainable. And so they have done their due diligence in receiving professional arborist reports. And the only other thing I would like to say is that the community is actually tasked with the fiduciary responsibility of maintaining that. tree which means maintaining the building too so something if they didn't maintain the tree and the building was to be damaged the the volunteer board members and myself as a manager may have failed our due diligence if we were not here meeting with you today and respectfully asking you to consider our request okay thank you public comments

Can I ask a real quick question? How old do you think that tree is? Does the arborist, the applicant know? I mean, I assume he knows.

You can't really tell without taking a core sample or if you cut it down counting. But I guess maybe 150.

Thank you.

All right. Yeah, come on up. Sure.

I'm going to, yeah. All right. Good evening, commissioners. My name is Rachel Stevenson. I'm an original owner at the Casitas of Larkspur, which, you know, is a very small six unit 18 year old property. Our community was intentionally designed in partnership with the city of Larkspur to preserve these heritage oak trees that are at the entrance of our property. as i shared i shared some photos earlier this week and i also shared the drawing of this exact tree that is the official logo of our property it's quite literally the symbol of our home i'm just respectfully asking the commission to continue this matter so that the tree can be evaluated by your preferred consulting arborist Under Larkspur Municipal Code 1216070, you're asked to consider the history of the property and the expectations of the owners. And as an original owner, many of us purchased our homes specifically because of these heritage oak trees that define the entrance of our property. I attended this HOA meeting where the removal of the tree was discussed. And at that meeting, there were no written arborist reports that were reviewed, only cost bids from the two companies. A $1,000 subsurface root assessment was mentioned, but not pursued. And the tree companies themselves both provided bids for structural pruning as an alternative to the removal. But those alternatives were not explored. Instead, they voted to remove the tree. As a small six-unit HOA, the board has also a responsibility to steward shared assets that affect the character and the property values of our community, and this Heritage Oak is definitely one of those assets. The discussion focused heavily just on liability concerns, yet to my knowledge, the HOA has not consulted with our insurance carrier about whether mitigation measures such as structural pruning or weight reduction could address those risks. I want to be clear that I respect my neighbors and I share their concern when it comes to safety. My request tonight is simply that this decision be based on a neutral expert evaluation before taking an irreversible step. As my photos shown, and as you probably saw today, three quarters of the canopy does remain lush and green. When a mature oak loses a limb, it doesn't necessarily mean that the tree has completely failed, but it does require professional rebalancing and weight reduction pruning. So before moving 150-year-old heritage oak that serves as a symbol of our property, I believe we owe it to the community and to the intent of the city's heritage tree protections to ensure that every reasonable option has been carefully evaluated. For that reason, I respect that we continue this matter with an independent arborist assessment. Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

All right. Any other public comments?

Sure.

Um, my name is Kim Stromwasser. I'm an original, I'm an owner at the condominium complex. Um, my feeling about this is that the tree is absolutely stunning and beautiful, and it's a heartbreaking situation that it's become diseased. And, um, It's with huge regret that I was with Ginger, who's the president of our HOA, when we had two arborists come out and look at the tree. And both said that the tree had rot in it and that it was... We heard from numerous, more than these two arborists, that if a tree loses 25% of its growth due to sickness, it's very unlikely to survive. And we've lost a third of this oak tree's... and the other parts of it we can see are rotten. So it is with great sadness that I feel that the tree needs to be removed. And because the arborist was saying that the two remaining parts of the tree, that one third of the tree fell, and the two remaining parts are on the side of our building. And so it's likely that if there is any imbalance, that it's going to hit the building and I just feel that the fiduciary responsibility of not letting that happen and damage our homes is also part of the issue. Thank you.

Thank you. I've got a question maybe for the folks that live there. I'm just curious if, you know, it looks like the branch that fell was facing towards some, like, parking areas. And, you know, did vehicles get damaged by that? No. Luckily, yeah.

And I also have a question. So I see it as a part of the building that's under the tree. It's really a question for staff, actually.

Before we get into Q&A, maybe we can finish public comment. Oh, I'm sorry.

Yeah, that's probably a good idea.

Are there any other members of the public that would like to comment?

If you're on Zoom and you want to comment, please raise your hand. One hand up. Suzanne Jansen should be able to unmute and speak.

All right, well, you're feedbacking, but we can hear you.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay, good. My name is Suzanne Jansen. I'm one of the owners, one of the six owners.

You may need to back away from what a speaker that you're listening to the meeting.

I am very concerned for the safety of my neighbors who live in the building closest to the tree. And again, given the amount of the tree that has been lost. I'm very concerned about safety issues. And I would vote for I support the removal of the tree. And that's all I want to say. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Anybody else?

Someone's coming up.

Yes.

I'm Ginger Robbins, and the tree is going to fall on our unit. So when Eric was out, he mentioned that there was a possibility of boring down into the roots. Eric, are you there?

Yes, I'm here.

There was something that you mentioned about doing a boring and you could determine whether there were more rotted roots down below that pathogen that you indicated. I believe that indicates root rot.

So root rot's a little bit of a misnomer. Phytophthora, it's probably better described as Phytophthora root disease because it doesn't really rot the big structural roots. The Phytophthora is kind of an indicator of just a different problem with the tree that makes it a little bit less desirable, but not really rotting the inside of it. I'll try not to go too much into the weeds on that, but... I think what I was speaking to and referring to at that point was probably sonic tomography. So it's a process where we'd shoot sound waves through the tree and then you can kind of make a 3D map of the tree to gauge the decay, which is definitely something that we could do and would just give us more data on what it's like inside the tree. However, just looking at the decay from the outside, and kind of giving a examination of it visually i didn't think it was necessary for you to spend the money and pay us to do that when uh when i think i could i could kind of gauge how much decay is in it and kind of give you my removal or pruning recommendation off that i think you indicated it would be about a thousand dollars to do that was that the Yes, that's correct. Yeah, that would be the more advanced tree risk assessment.

Okay. Okay. Thank you, Eric.

That answered my question. Okay. Yeah.

All right. Any other public comments?

The manager has raised their hand again. I don't know if you'd like to hear from sure. Yeah, of course. Casey, you should be able to speak.

Okay, thank you. I just want to refer to Rachel's comment. And Rachel, thank you for coming. As you had stated, this is a really sad loss for us, even as the manager who does not live there. But she had referred to independent opinions. And we did have... eric and another professional arborist that are both been arborist for a very long time so i don't know how much more independent that we could get unless the the city would recommend something i also would like to say that the association has a budget that's based on their operating expenses and the reserve study which we use professionals like Eric and other arborists and other professionals to plan out their future up to 30 years. As Eric alluded to, this is not part of the budget to do an ER, so to speak. I trust Eric and I trust the other arborists. It's really sad. It is sad. I wish we weren't here right now, but That's all I had to say.

All right. Thank you. Go ahead.

As an owner, and maybe this is out there, but I've never seen a report that has specifically said that the trees needs to come down. And maybe you have that, but I have never seen that. And the two, three companies that came out, as I mentioned, both gave an either or, that we could either remove the tree or we could prune the trees. And the decision was made to remove the trees. However, I've never seen a report that says we definitely need to remove the trees. So...

Thanks. Can I recommend that the HOA shares a copy of this report we have? That's what I'm saying. Maybe she hasn't seen it.

All right. All right. Let's, if there's no other comments, let's bring, does Casey have her hand up again?

I was just going to say, she said that there was two options, but then she also said she didn't see them. So I'm not sure where that comes from. We are, I think the board would be happy to direct me to share those proposals with Rachel. However, owners are not actually entitled to contracts or proposals to the board approves and engages in them. So it's kind of twofold there.

but i i feel that yeah that's not that's not our concern here and just say that the arborist report that was prepared is public it's attached to the staff reporting yeah okay let's uh absent that uh there's any other all right let's bring it back to the commission um what's that yes close the public comment and bring it back to the commission There you go. Thank you. All right. Well, where do you want to start? Liam, why don't we start?

Yeah. So I live in Greenbrae and I walk by that tree a lot and it's a beautiful tree. I, you know, sort of, I think I was thinking about sort of what our role here is as a planning commission. And I think it's to create um you know protect public resources and make sure that trees that don't need to be cut down aren't cut down but i i don't think that our role um i i guess i i would be concerned that if we said if we told somebody that they could not take down a tree that an arborist has recommended removal of and then you know something were to happen that you know i feel that that would weigh heavily on on me In addition, I looked at the findings that we need to make. We have specific findings that we need to make. I won't go through them all, I guess, right here. They're in the staff report, but I think I can make the findings, especially with the um, the arborist report that recommends removal. You know, I'm not an arborist, uh, the tree, you know, I could see that it didn't, there was some recent damage. There was some with like some rot in there, but you know, I'm not an arborist and the arborist that, um, you know, the, the, the HOA engaged is, is recommending removal. And so I feel like I'm not in a position to sort of dispute that with my own expert opinion. Um, Nor, I think, would I be comfortable telling somebody that they can't remove a tree that's been recommended for removal. So I think with that, I can make the findings. And with regret, it's a beautiful tree. But those are my thoughts. Great. Tamara?

One of the questions I had for the applicant is what happens if we approve removing the tree? What are you going to do? Are you going to replace it with another tree? Are they going to plant another coastline oak there? I didn't see any. Should this be approved? What would happen next plans? I'm going to jump in here for the applicant. Okay.

Basically, they didn't provide any details of a replant, but the code does say that the Planning Commission has the authority to require a replant in the case of a remote.

Okay. That's what I thought, but I wasn't sure. But I wasn't because I didn't see anything that they had planned. So we would just add that to the motion. Okay. That's a great question.

Natasha.

I actually agree with pretty much everything Commissioner Campbell said. I think it's an absolutely stunning tree and it breaks my heart to see that it would have to go. But when I went to see it, it was scarily close to that house that was next to it, like scarily close. And given that it was... And it was pointed out in the arborist report, the roots, obviously, you could see the gap at the bottom of the tree on the tree trunk and then the limb missing. there's clearly a risk that something could happen there. And it reminds me of the yoke tree that came down on King mountain on the King mountain path that just came down in the night. Um, but I also, as the way we're supposed to do it went through the, um, the, the required findings that are in the staff report. And it does clearly say that, you know, it must not adversely affect the top top topography of the land and it doesn't. And, um, There has to be... There's no adverse effect of the general health and safety or welfare or detrimental to persons or property in the vicinity. And also the... This is the most important one. The condition of the tree poses a hazard with respect to danger of falling and a proximity to proposed structures. And I think it clearly is really... That's like the danger point and that's what really jumped out at me. So... As much as I would love to save the tree, and as I kind of went into this thinking, I'm sure we can find a way to save this tree, I kind of ended up with, I can make the finding for removal.

Brock? Oh, dear. I think it's an incredibly beautiful tree, and it looks healthier than the two oak trees on my property, to be honest. It's got quite a robust canopy structure. And if I hadn't seen the arborist report, I would have said it was a healthy tree. I mean, oak trees over time look pretty beaten up sometimes. So I would prefer to save the tree personally, but it's a position we're in where it seems like we really need to let them do what they want to do just in terms of liability and safety.

I share Brock's opinion and everybody's opinion. We had a very similar situation on our property on Wiltshire. We had a 200-plus-year-old oak tree. And I think Eric may have come out and seen it. This is about 25 years ago. Maybe it wasn't you, but somebody from Bartlett did. They did an excellent report, and I really wanted to save that tree. Unfortunately, just liability-wise, it just wasn't feasible. It actually went over part of Wiltshire Avenue, and it was enormous. It was old. And so we removed it, and when we removed it, we discovered that the entire interior of the tree had been struck by lightning at one point, and it was a hollow shell of a tree. And just the very outside of it was holding that thing up, and I just... It would have been horrifying had that thing fallen. It would have possibly killed people. So I think unfortunately we have to go with safety. And as much as I would love to save this tree, I love oak trees. And you know there's such great habitats for so many creatures. I would make the findings that I would trust the experts on this one.

I would like to add that I personally would like to add a condition that a tree was replaced. Unfortunately, I think that's going to be at the cost of the HOA. But I would love to...

But you can't replace it with a giant oak tree.

Oh, but with something else.

I also want to say something else. So... In my opinion, I think that it's not our place to... I mean, I don't want our decision tonight to be... What I said earlier, my opinion is that I can make the findings for the treaty be removed. I don't want that to be misconstrued as... us or the planning commission requiring that the tree be removed. I think that's ultimately up to the homeowners association and the folks that are living there that would be affected by it. And it's not our risk assessment to make, but, you know, if structural pruning or other options are out there that, you know, the homeowners association or whoever would like to pursue i don't want to preclude them from doing that i guess but we're making the findings in the report they've come to us for the approval and we can just make the approval that's all right so i think that like from the planning commission's perspective the option is there for the applicant to remove the tree but it's not a requirement i guess okay Does that make sense?

I'm saying that in the event that they do remove it, it would be...

I guess it was sort of separate from that. I agree with you. I guess I'm addressing Brock's concern. It doesn't seem like it's our position to... Well, they can choose not to do it, I guess.

They can choose another path. We're giving them permission to do it if they find that they need to do. All right, so can I have a motion?

Oh, I'm making a motion. Go ahead. Let's see, what are we approving officially? Approving the heritage tree removal permit for 220 Lower Via Casitas, APN 022-153-19, project number HTR 26-004. to approve the removal of a coast live oak with a circumference of 141 inches with a new condition of approval that if it is removed, it is their ultimate decision to remove it, that they replace it with another tree.

Second. I'll second. All right. Roll call.

Commissioner Wagstaff? Yes. Commissioner Chalmers? Yes.

Yes.

Commissioner Hall. Yes. Vice Chair Campbell. Yes. Chair Swisher. Yes.

All right. Moving on. Business items. So next is the annual housing element progress report.

Good evening, Chair Swisher, members of the Planning Commission. So this is an annual... annual every city and county in the state of California reviews the annual progress report on their housing element this time of year our Housing element calls for this review to be made by Planning Commission and City Council It is a very it's a spreadsheet in a format that the state of California's Housing and Community Development Department creates for this purpose And it's a little bit difficult to read. We had a difficult challenge getting the exhibits together. I did print some in the back of the room. And I have some copies there if you'd like a print copy. It is probably one of the most complicated spreadsheets I think I've worked with. It has a dozen tabs and sub tabs. So it's a very hard thing for us to print. But I'm going to summarize what we have this year. Next slide. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm already ahead of you.

So, yeah, go to the next one. Go ahead.

So... We're in the third year of the sixth cycle, so this is the third progress report we've done for the housing element in this cycle. Our housing element was certified by HCD on October 8, 2024. HCD requires every city and county to report on the pipeline of permits from entitlement to certificate of occupancy, but the progress towards our regional housing needs assessment is our allocation is based on the number of permitted housing units. Next slide. So in 2025, we did not have a lot of new housing units. We only permitted 10. The entire year, they were consisting entirely of accessory dwelling units. Per the methodology, the state has a, or the ABAC has a methodology for how we allocate ADUs, and they're distributed between low, very low and moderate income, low, moderate, and I'm sorry, Low, very low and moderate income based on a 30, 30, 30, 10 percentage rate. So sometimes when people see the way we allocate ADUs in our annual housing progress report, they think, oh, but my ADU wasn't really for low or very low. It really doesn't matter. It's just a random allocation. And so that's how ADUs are allocated when we report to the state, and every jurisdiction does it the same way. So I just wanted to point that out. But you can see on our screen, I also have a printout in the back. If you'd like me to bring it up, there should be one in your agenda packet. So this year we had the 10 units added to our agenda. RENA numbers last year was number 21. In 2023, we had 16 units. So up for these three years in the cycle so far, that brings us up to a total of 96 units. That means we have 883 units remaining. This was a very slow year, but we don't expect that to be the case next year because we expect the Ross sewer site to develop. That's quite a few housing units. I think it's 350, if I'm not mistaken. It's like 320 or 350 units in that project. And on the opposite side, we have another housing element site that's slated for, I believe, 235 units, if I'm not mistaken. And so next year, we may very well have quite a spike of housing units on our project. annual progress report if those come in for building permits in this current year for 2026. So 2025 was a very quiet year, but we don't expect that to be the case next year. We also have two projects that are under construction. I think Magnolia Village was reported in 2024, if I'm not mistaken. And then we have 1,000 Drake's Landing, which I don't believe they've gotten building permits yet. So that will probably be in this year's numbers. So that's, I think, 14 units, if I'm not mistaken. So like I said, even though we have 10 this year, we do expect 2025 and potentially 2026 and 2027 to be much, much higher than this. And that's not unusual. I mean, a lot of cities see these spikes when you get a few really big projects in and you can accomplish a lot with your numbers. So it was a very quiet year. Interestingly, I started on January 5th with the city. So I was noting this is probably the first annual progress report where I wasn't involved with a city, so I'm reporting on my predecessor's efforts. Next slide. We do also report to HCD on all of the housing element programs that we work on. Many of those programs are ongoing, all kinds of different things related to below market rate unit monitoring, so making sure that people will Landlords comply that they're renting out our below market rate units to people in the right income brackets. We contract with Marin Housing for that service. ADUs, we have ADU Marin, which is an ADU service center that we encourage all of our residents to utilize when they want to build an ADU. It's like having someone help you along the way as you design that. It's a great free service for our residents that the city helps pay for. Now we also have programs, one of those programs, you know, we've been talking in our last minute meeting about the floor area ratio limits. So one of the housing element programs, it's not just for single family homes, but also for multifamily homes. So when we come back to planning commission, we talk about floor area ratio. When we solve this, we need to do it for both single family and multifamily because the housing element policy, H2F identifies it for multifamily as well. And then another city council goal that was discussed at the city council's retreat back on February 7th was related to aging in place. And we have a housing element program, HG2, which is on universal design. And universal design is a construction design standard that's related to aging in place that requires all structures be designed for usability by all people, regardless of age, ability, or mobility, without needing adaptation. So... A lot of people forget the ADA doesn't apply in a private single-family home. It's the Fair Housing Act that applies just the exterior if you have a multifamily building. So the idea is that the interior would also be designed to accommodate all users. That is an item in the housing element that is for the planning commission to recommend and the council to ultimately decide. There are pros and cons of that policy. One of the pros is You have new housing that's designed for all users. The cons is it can't add to construction costs. So we would have to present that and talk about the pros and cons. It's not required that it be adopted in the housing element. It's only required that we discuss the topic. So I just point that out. And next slide. We did receive one. I'm happy to answer questions when I'm done. We did receive one public comment from. Call more in home. I heard that they did send out comment letters to other communities. I'm just saying, hey, you only did 10, 10 unit units. We emailed that public comment to the commissioners. earlier and we have copies available if there's anyone in the audience who wants one so with that i'm happy to answer questions about this year's arena an annual progress report and we'll be bringing this to city council given the outcome of the planning commission's recommendation tonight and we'll be presenting again on march 18th okay I should point out there was a typo in the original staff report. It was not in any of your packets, but it was posted online for a little bit. The completed number of permits issued are 96. We had the wrong number identified in the table in the staff report, but it was correct in your packets.

And just to be clear, the units had to be completed to count? No, they have to be permitted. So that's the funny thing.

We currently report all three steps, entitlement, permitting, and certificate of occupancy, and that's when it's finished. But the state HCD only counts it based on permits issued. So they will see all three in our annual report, but the only number that matters that applies towards the RHNA numbers is permits issued.

What happens if we get to the end of our cycle? Well, you know the rest of my question.

Yeah, if you get to the end of your cycle and you don't meet your goal, I mean, certainly you get scrutinized for that when you do your housing element update. And I would say that it's a goal. We aren't able as cities and counties to produce housing ourselves. But what we do is we make the garden fertile so that people can build those houses. And the whole purpose of our housing element programs is to come up with policies and programs that further affordable housing and fair housing and Also, you know, make it easier for people to build, you know, as you can.

But there's no legislative penalty, though.

There are legislative penalties, indeed. There is now an enforcement arm of housing and community development where they can come in and they can decertify your housing element. They can also impose penalties on a city, and they have done that.

If we don't reach the numbers.

If you don't comply with the program that you have in place.

Okay.

Yeah. And it's not common. It's kind of a new thing. So it's not been seen that often. But one of the things that you've heard in the news that's a penalty is called builder's remedy.

Yeah.

So if you don't have a certified housing element, builder's remedy applies.

Right, but that was the pressure we had to approve the housing element. That's right. I guess what I'm asking is now that we've done that piece and we've done the best we can with that, if we can't get the developers or the developers don't come, housing whatever, construction costs are too expensive, is there legislative penalties on the city in the event that the developers are just not developing?

Yeah. I mean, if it's not, it really has to come down to what the city has not done. It's a failure to act. It's, it's, it's, I mean, most cities in the last cycle didn't meet their numbers, you know, small cities like ours. It's, it's not unusual for, for cities to not, I mean, my last jurisdiction certainly didn't. I didn't. So, but it's a goal. You really do try. So.

Okay, thank you. Oh, and what does, it's obvious, but what does SFR mean?

Single Family Residential.

Oh, yeah, that's the obvious.

Sorry, I apologize for the acronyms we use. No, that's okay.

I didn't figure that one out.

Do you know, you guys are kind of in tune with how the rest of the Bay Area are doing? How is, I mean, this, I understand cities didn't make their numbers on the last cycle, but it seems like there's been a lot more, there's a lot more enforcement and higher numbers this go around. How are other cities doing, you know, compared to us?

They have a dashboard on their website, HCD, so you can actually see how cities are doing. They do, they do share these numbers. So you can, I couldn't speak to our neighboring communities. I really don't know how well they're doing, but I do know from my colleagues, like in Puerto Madera, they, she didn't, you know, my colleague there didn't give me the number, but unfortunately most of the cities like ours around us, it's ADUs are the bulk of their, housing unless they had a new, you know, apartment building constructed. You know, it's typically the way you reach your goal is through what we have identified as our housing sites. You know, we've got these, you know, two, 300 unit apartment buildings identified. So if someone comes in and does, you know, you do three, 300 unit apartment buildings, we've hit our goal. And I've got two, you know, that I expect next year. So we're going to get pretty close, I think, by the end of this eight-year cycle. So I'm hopeful in the next two years we'll have hammered out another 500 units or more.

Thank you. Do we need to make a motion or do something?

Do we need to make a motion? What motion would you like us to make here?

Something with city council.

It's just a motion as per the staff recommendation. The commission recommends city council acceptance of the annual progress report. Okay.

I move that city council accept the annual progress report of the housing element of the Larkspur general plan. I'll second it.

Roll call, please.

Commissioner Wagstaff? Yes. Commissioner Chalmers? Yes. Commissioner Hall? Yes. Vice Chair Campbell? Yes. And Chair Swisher?

Yes.

Thank you. All right.

Next item on the agenda is the approval of the February 24th Planning Commission meeting minutes.

I've got one quick comment on that. After adjourn, I know this is like the worst part to correct the minutes. It says the start time will be 6.30 or 7, depending on the outcome of item 5A, but 6.30. It is 6.30.

Yeah.

We're watching you, Alex. Other than that, I move to approve the minutes of February 24th, 2026.

I'll second.

All right.

Can we all just go? Yeah, let's see.

Commissioner Wagstaff, yes. Commissioner Hall, yes.

Commissioner Chalmers, yes.

Vice Chair Campbell, yes.

And Chair Switzer. And I'll abstain since I wasn't at that meeting.

All right.

So the next is the motion for adjournment. Oh, wait. Planning Commissioner reports. Sorry, I missed that one. Planning Commissioner reports. Do we have any?

Uh, I would go ahead.

Well, I just wondered if it was possible and I raised this with Alex earlier to change the date of the next meeting from April 14 to a different date. Um, I have a conflict and I would like to attend given this it's only once a month, um, especially with the new time makes it a little tricky for me, but I wanted to see if that was possible.

Yeah, I was going to... What would you propose to?

Oh, you're going to miss it too? Oh, okay. Well, that... To the 21st...

It's not the 21st now.

No, it's on the 14th.

Oh, the 14th now, yeah.

I would miss the 21st as well. Oh, you would?

Yeah.

20...

The 28th would be your other meeting of that month if you didn't adjust the schedule.

We talked about that.

If you'd like to have a meeting... It seemed like the policy we heard was that you would have a special meeting at what was the second meeting in the month, so it would be the second.

I mean, I have 28th. It was already in my calendar.

Or the fourth Tuesday, I'm sorry.

The 28th.

Yes. So if it's the pleasure of the Planning Commission, we can certainly schedule. We can cancel the 14th and have a special meeting on April 28th. Did I summarize that correctly? Yes. Is that too long?

Because we have an item that we continued from this meeting and that would be like two months for them. I'm wondering if that's like two or if there's other stuff that's going to happen in the next two months, if that's too far of a gap.

I don't think we can go back and change that decision given the, yeah.

Not that we're suggesting to change it. No, no, no, not to change it.

I was just thinking like.

It's a long wait for them.

Maybe if we had a meeting, I'm not trying to add meetings. We had one at the end of this month and then something like that.

I don't know if we have a meeting on the 21st, but we'd have to check.

Oh, I see what you're saying.

Because we have other questions that meet, and so I just wanted to make sure that I'm not interfering with one of those.

You're suggesting we meet on the 24th?

I mean the 24th. I was talking about the 24th of March, maybe.

Oh, the 24th of March.

At our next previously meeting. I don't know. I'm just throwing it out there if there's stuff that we need to do between now and the end of March.

I can do that. I mean... If we're meeting more regularly, I think it's less of a concern if there's one person missing, but given it was once...

So do we want to propose a meeting on March 24th? Is that too soon for you guys to...

I think likely that would be the only item.

That would be the only item I think so far would be the fuel cell if it was on March 24th. I'm not sure if they'd be ready that fast, though.

That's the other side of the coin.

Well, they said a week. It's possible we could

Yeah, we would have to re-notice it, I think, if we had the meeting on the 24th, because it's not a regular meeting.

How about the 31st?

That's not a regular meeting.

That's not a regular meeting, I know that. But that's...

I mean, in lieu of... Our motion was we continued it to the next meeting.

Yes, that's true.

You didn't say what the date was or when it was, to be fair.

We will notice it regardless. I think the 31st would probably be... I don't think there's a conflict. I don't, I'm not seeing any conflicts on the city calendar. So Tuesday, March 31st is an option for the planning commission.

Okay.

And yeah.

Why don't you look into it and just let us know.

We have to decide tonight. Yes.

Yes. You'll have to make a motion if you want to create a special meeting.

But this would replace the 14th. Right. Okay.

So that would be two, one, two, three weeks from now, maybe the 31st, and it would replace the April 14th meeting. Yeah. And we're not having a meeting on the 24th? Is that what you're saying? No. 24th of March.

Correct.

Would there be a meeting in April?

Yes, there would be a meeting at the end of, oh, no, there's no, then it would, the next meeting would be May 5th.

May 12th?

No, May 5th.

If you're looking at the calendar invite that was sent, I need to work on that.

It didn't work for me, but I can talk to you offline about that to get it.

Okay, so what are we proposing here?

The 31st of March at 6.30.

Yeah, that's fine. That works for me. We can get a motion, a second, and a vote.

Okay. Liam? I move to hold a special meeting of the Larkspur Planning Commission on March 31st, 2026 at 6.30 p.m. In lieu of the April 21st. Yeah, in lieu of the April 21st meeting.

April 14th.

Sorry, April 14th. April 14th, yeah.

Sorry, April 14th.

I'll second that.

Okay. Opposed? All in favor? Yes.

Aye.

Aye. Well, the next Planning Commission meeting will be on Tuesday, March 31st at 6.30. Right.

Thank you. And thank you very much. And then the meeting after that would be what date? Because it's no longer...

Cancel the April 14th meeting. May 12th.

So it's actually all the way out to May 12th.

Well, we could also have a meeting with three people. I mean, that's a quorum, right?

Yeah.

Or on the 14th. We'll report back on March 31st.

How's that sound?

That sounds great. So keep it on people's calendar. Yeah.

And we do not have a meeting on April 7th. Is that correct?

No. Oh, so it's once a month now.

Oh, I did not hear that.

Yeah, it's once a month at 6.30.

Okay. There we have it.

On the second Tuesday.

All right. In theory. Very good.

Very good.

That's right. So second Tuesday of each month at 6.30 p.m. is our schedule. We have updated the website.

Okay. Very good.

All right.

That being said, are there any other reports?

I'd like to bring up something. Sure. Have any of you been down to see the pump house in Heather Park?

No.

So you were talking about what we... It came before us, if you remember. And we asked for planting textured concrete, some other things. You need to go down and look, because the Heather Gardens people are very much up in arms over. It's pretty utilitarian.

Is it finished? Yeah. Has it finished? It's finished.

And it's completely asphalted right to the building. And there are electric panels all over the side of the, you know, there's textured concrete, but there's stuff all over it.

It sounds like an enforcement issue, right, from the city?

No, it's done. I can certainly...

I can certainly take a look at it and speak with the public works director if it's not been constructed to the conditions of approval that the Planning Commission set forth.

At the very least, if there's some way to put planters or something that breaks up that... I think that's... They need to comply with the... But it never actually came back before us again. We sent them out and... With some suggestion.

I thought they did come back. They came to us twice, right?

Not when I was there.

Oh.

I think you might have. You were recused. You were recused from that. Oh, that's. Oh, that's.

Yeah. I do know that the public works department working in my neighborhood and it took them a while to come back and finish it. But I guess that's one thing City could check on.

Well, I'm just, I've been asked by multiple people in that regard. And received. So I'm bringing it up.

Thank you.

All right. Noted. Anything else?

Is everybody going to the library grand opening? Yes. I'd love to.

Very good. And I think they've done a fantastic job on that. And the planting is really nice.

Yeah, it's looking really good.

I'm going to have to live a lot longer before it fills in.

Yeah, it's very nice. And yeah, it's beautiful. I give real credit to my lovely wife's refugia for their pollinator garden plans, which are really excellent. All right. Do I have a motion for adjournment?

I move to adjourn. I'll second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Thank you.