Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Are we all set? Yeah.

Thanks. Really want this duck to make a lot of noise. Still doesn't do it. Want that duck to do it. I'm going to figure that out by my by the next one because it'll be the last time I get to do that. All right. Uh welcome to 2026. The entire 25 year went by so quick. Uh we had what 22 21 meetings last year. It was a good year. Got a lot done. So now we have a new year and we're starting off well. We've got a tree permit tonight on the thing. But before we get going into that, start with the roll call.

Commissioner Ron, Vice Chair Walton here. Chair Woodson here. Commissioner St. John here. Commissioner Chang here. Commissioner Jacobson here. You have quorum. Thank you very much. Uh and as I mentioned before, um is Commissioner Baron, she online. Why not? Um I do not see Commissioner Baron online. Commissioner Baron is excused tonight. So she will not she won't be here. Um do we have anybody else just so I know? Actually, I just she just popped in. Cool. So, do we have anybody else? I'm curious.

Uh, we have one a couple other people online. So, we will need to open up each item for public comment.

Thank you. All right. Next we have is a moment of silence and the pledge of allegiance. Commissioner Walton, you take the honors, please. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for its one nation, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Right. Next up is we have special announcements and communications from the floor. So that would be any items that the public has uh that is on an item that is not on the agenda for today. So pretty much anything in the world except the tree permit for forte you could talk about. Anybody in main audience here? Nothing. No new year's wishes. Best comments about the surf line and the new construction traffic being open. All right. What about on the public side online? Is there anybody?

I don't see anybody's raised their hand. Chair Woodson,

thank you very much. Right. Going once, going twice. Public comment communication floor is closed. Um, next up is exparte communications for quasi judicial matters. Anything internal from the commission that you would like to raise over the last month? silence. Okay. All right. We have nothing there. Moving on. I think on the consent agenda, um, as usual, we have main thing is the approval of the minutes from December. Are there any updates or comments or changes that from the minutes from last month that somebody would like to raise? I'd like to make a motion that the minutes be approved as written. Okay.

So, we have a motion from Commissioner St. John. I'll second. Vice Chair Walton gets the second. Oh, [clears throat] Chair, we before there's a vote on the minutes, I have to ask, is Commissioner Baron participating tonight? She is not. We discussed that. So she is if she participates, she is only participating as a resident of Marina or as a resident. Uh right. Okay. So not voting. Correct. Got it. Thank you. Not and and also not taking part in the conversation except for during open public comment period on the agenda item.

Chair, how about the um the conflict of interest on me on the minutes? December 18th. Um, should we be amended? I have to look back for a second. See? Okay. Metro Commissioner members Chang and Woodson are accused of proximity.

Yeah. Yeah. So, I think that that's actually that's not on the minutes. That's No, but that is a it is an issue. I'm sorry. So, not on the minutes for December, but for the agenda items for today, we've got there's a conflict of interest statement on on Mr. Chang and myself as being recused from proximity to the primary residents of the I can explain that if you'd like, chair, what's that? I I can help explain if if there's a question about that.

Well, there's not a question because I live over a thousand both of us. I live over a thousand feet away from the boundary of the project line. So, I'm not covered. Uh, oh, I just mean that it doesn't I'm I'm trying to clarify that it doesn't have to do with the minutes from the item we're talking about now is the minutes from last meeting. Okay. All right. Sorry. Okay. [clears throat] So, we have a motion. Yes. Then please explain. [clears throat] Uh, we can do that when we get to the item. Why don't we do that so we stay in order?

Okay. So, all right. So, going back to it, which is what I thought that didn't pertain to the minutes. So, I believe we still have a motion and a second to approve the minutes. [clears throat] I'm sorry. Who made the second? Chair Woodson. Vice Chair Walton. Okay. So, u So, the question still arrives. Commissioner Rana. No. Do you approve the minutes? I'm okay. So, I'm doing a roll call to approve the minutes. So, I'm going to call each commissioner's name and you can say yes or no to approve the minutes. So, Commissioner Rana, Vice Chair Walton, yes.

Chair Woodson, yes. Commissioner St. John, yes. Commissioner Chang, yes. Commissioner Jacobson, yes. Motion passes. Okay. So next thing we have which I believe is the public hearing on the forag on the for regional trail and greenway. So I guess we do have the conflict of interest issue that need to explain and understand because I don't so please

yeah I I can explain. So that that that is um I [clears throat] believe you're referring to a reference in the staff report for the tree permit item you just opened and that um was uh determined rather late to today to be an error. Um an inadvertent and overcautious inclusion in the staff uh report. So we've deleted that. Um, I assume you're looking at a version that shows that in strikeout and replaced with language just to clarify for your benefit and the benefit of the public that there is actually no conflict of interest. So hopefully that hopefully that

so I I I think what's happened is it's in the it still is showing up in the printed agenda from the downloaded version that was online. Okay. But to your point, Widor and I talked about it this afternoon um a couple hours ago and realized that and we went ahead and removed it. So yes, I know about the striketh through. I think yes, we just needed to raise it to the public to let them know that that was an error in the agenda that's still online. Uh well, I'm I'm I'm in the agenda that's online. Um maybe it's

all right. Let me just clarify. So it's been our practice for a number of years to print off packets. So I think some of the commissioners have the printed off packet uh and then we've subsequently uploaded the uh correct strike through and so that's where the discrepancy is. So we're good in terms of the recusal. All the commissioners here are able to vote on the item and so we can proceed. And that does make sense because you're right. I've got the one online pulled up, Seth. And it's got it does have the strike through. Okay.

With the So, so that is our confusion for the year. No more no more. No more confusion. First meeting out the gate and the first agenda item and we're we're done for the year. I think that's a success story. Um all right. [clears throat] Now that we have that done, I think we go ahead and we'll do the presentation Phil on the forte. Thank you. Um Guer, do you want us? Yeah, I can pull up.

One second. With that mild anxiety spike, we can get back to the project. Um, so I am Phil Angelo. I'm senior planner with City Marina and I'll be presenting staff's report on the Fort Tag uh California Avenu segment tree removal permit. Uh, next slide. Uh, so this is probably um information many of you may already have, but um, forag is the Ford Regional Trail and Greenway. Uh, it would consist of a 28 mile trail network, three segments of which are funded and/or under construction. These include the California Avenue segment uh which is the subject of the tree removal permit uh before the commission tonight. Um the network would have be an active pedestrian and bicycle corridor uh that connects the various communities of the Monterey Peninsula together uh and to open space areas like the Ford National Monument and the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail. Okay. Uh so the Forte project has been in development for a number of years. Uh in 2014, the city joined uh other local entities in partnering with TAMC or the transportation agency of Monterey County to build the regional trail. Uh as the lead agency of the project, TMC certified an EIR for TAG in 2020. Uh and in 2024, Delray Oak segment of the trail began construction, which uh brings us today to where we're considering the California Avenue portion. Um, next. And this is a vicinity map uh that shows the California Avenue segment in red. Um, it would be on property that's owned by the city of Marina. Uh, and after construction is complete, the city would continue ownership and maintenance of the trail. Next.

Um and this has both the demolition extent for the project and a summary of the tree removal. Um there are 151 ordinanceized trees um that are in the vicinity of the project. Um so within or adjacent to the trail. Uh 94 of these trees are in good health and would either be removed or potentially impacted uh by the project as work would occur within the drip line of the trees. Um, of these 94 healthy trees, uh, 56 were initially proposed for removal. Um, however, after a tree committee hearing, um, the applicant was able to preserve one additional tree. So now, uh, 55 healthy trees would be removed. Um, the majority of the trees being removed are coastlive oaks and none are designated as landmark trees. So, as previously mentioned, the project went before the uh city's tree committee who considered it on October 8th, 2025. Uh in accordance with the city's tree preservation ordinance, typically after the tree committee makes a recommendation on the project, um the community development director would take the final action on it. Um however, in this case, it's been referred to the planning commission for final action. uh given the scale of the project and to provide additional transparency uh the permit would be subject to conditions that are outlined in the staff report which include Tamy paying a fee of uh $55,000 uh in lie of replanting the 55 uh healthy trees that are being removed um in addition to tree protection measures and compliance with the mitigation measures uh in the certified EI. Oh, Nick. Uh so the tree committee recommended two specific uh conditions for the project. Uh the first was that the applicant provide a tree protection plan and measures for the trees that were in the immediate vicinity of the project uh but that wouldn't be removed. Um the

applicant submitted those measures and they've been incorporated both into the conditions of approval and in the project plans. Uh the second was that the applicant identify if there were any uh additional healthy coastlive oak or Monterey cypress trees with a diameter at breast height of 24 in or greater that could be preserved. Um the applicants reviewed the plans and identified eight of these trees. Uh however, only one of them could be preserved um due to without compromising the trail alignment or design or relocate an area that would increase uh impacts to Monterey Gileia habitat. Um I don't want to go through every single tree. U but as an example um the three that are in red stars here um couldn't be retained without compromising the trails connection both to the new bus stop at Immunen uh to the east and to the Jerry Smith portion of the Fort Tag Trail to the south. Um and that concludes staff's presentation. I believe Tamy has an additional uh presentation, but this would be uh staff's recommended motion. Thanks, Phil, very much. All right, so tonight we'll have four tag present and then I'll have the commissioners just provide comments and then we'll open it up to the public and then come back to the commissioners and then we will then take a vote on that. That's good. It's the order for tonight. So, welcome

on. Now it's on. Hi, my name is Yanuka Strauss. I'm a senior transportation planner with the transportation agency for Monterey County and I'm the project manager for the Forte California Avenue uh segment. And tonight I have with us um our consultant GHD who's been working on the final design and right ofway for this project. So I will actually turn it over to Shannon to deliver the presentation.

Thank you Yanuka. I'm Shannon Ano. I'm a senior transportation engineer and project manager at GHD. And I have our arborist Nate Oakley with us in case there's any questions. I'll be giving most of the presentation, but he's here as backup to answer any questions you guys might have. So, thank you for having us. Um, so thanks for that great presentation, Phil. I don't have to go through a lot of the stuff that's in here. Um, these are the project partners. We TMC is the lead agency for the project. uh GHD has been working on the design for this project. Next slide please. So today we'll go through a little bit about the vision of for tag um how we've gotten from the concept of for tag through the design to where we are today uh the permitting and then answer any questions you might have. Next slide. So the vision for four tag, I won't iterate too much that Phil has already said, but the idea of fortag is to connect the communities around Monterey Bay to each other and to open space via accessible paths for biking, walking, rolling, strolling. Um, and the the original founders of Forag, Scott Waltz and Fred Watson, have been with us through this whole process, helping reiterate the vision and make sure that the the design aligns with their vision. So how does the vision for for tag filter down into the design? First of all, we look at accessibility. We want to build a track a path that is accessible to all people um wheelchairs included. Uh wide enough for two cyclists to ride side by side um and pass each other comfortably with grades that are less than 5% that are traversible. Uh we look for opportunities to make safe and convenient connections to other trails and to roadways. And then along the way

we try to foster environmental stewardship avoiding working to avoid any habitat impacts that we can as well as tree impacts um as well as foster stewardship and a connection to the land. So when we um as Phil mentioned this project has an approved EIR and 30% design and anou from the cities involved. We came into the project at 30% and the first thing we did was head out to the field with Scott and Fred city of Marina and walk the potential alignment. Uh we had our environmental surveys completed. As you guys know, the biggest issue in Marina is the Monterey Gileia habitat. So, I'm sure you guys are very familiar. Um, on this map, the the blue circles and dots in the right hand side are all of the Gileia occurrences in that little city parcel there in between road and 8th. So, we started working our way through that area um looking at an alignment that would be accessible and that would try to avoid that Gileia as much as possible. The 30% design um envisioned a bridge over Mjen Road. As we were out there, it became pretty apparent that we would have pretty big impacts to the Gileia habitat. The Gileia habitat is not only the Gileia occurrences, but anywhere out there is considered potential Gileia habitat. So, as um what you're seeing in the lower right hand side was our evaluation of how where we would put the bridges. And what you can see is that the trail would be built up really high to get over the road, which would create large slopes or large retaining walls that would be visually impacted impacting the corridor as well as uh impacting the Gileia habitat. So along came the Imjen Parkway expansion project and we saw an

opportunity to pair up with that in a in a different context. So the Imun Parkway project now kind of creates um a a road that's more controlled traffic controlled less less like it was before where it's just an open space area. So we saw an opportunity to do an atgrade crossing that would be less impact to the Gileia habitat, less impact overall um and provide a better connection to the bus stops and to the additional um trails. So those are just the kind of things that we're doing during 30% design refinement. Um we're obvious we're also looking at the other pieces. This is just an example of uh how we refine our design. Next slide. And then we look at areas where we have constraints. Um the first time we walked the site out there, a concerned resident from the neighborhood came out and was asking about the trees right along this corridor. So this is a tree right in front of the equestrian center. The manager of the equestrian center came out there on our second sitewalk and said, "Hey, you guys are going to protect this tree, right?" And we said, "Well, we'll work to do with what we can." Um, so in this area area, we worked with the city to figure out kind of what they were okay with in terms of how close the path can be to the the street as well as a minimum width. So we we we want to generally provide a 12t wide path. That's what Fortag has envisioned. At this point um near an intersection, we're willing to pinch that down to 8 ft to get around a tree like this. It's very it's very context context sensitive whether or not we can do that. This isn't an area where people will be slowing down um and and starting from an intersection. Here's another example. At Patton Parkway, there are there was recently some trees removed a couple of years ago. Um and then there are some trees that still remain out there. And so we

we work to get the trail around two existing trees out there with a a nice little plaza area that can enjoy the shade from that as well as um that's one area we can plant another tree. Um so with that, this is you might have to click a couple times. I forgot this one is animated. I'm used to giving the presentation myself with the clicker. So, with that, I think we've come up with a trail that has really great connection opportunities through through the city of Marina. Um, we heard some really great feedback at our public outreach events about people excited to use this trail and get out and open get out to other trails in the area.

And there's more. And I know there's more. [laughter]

Yeah. Next slide, please. Actually, hold on to it. Yeah, sure. Let's go back to that one. Just can you walk through the because that's actually a very good slide because I think that shows the connection pieces. Yeah. Can you walk through this slide with the group that way I don't have to come back later?

Yes. Yes. Yeah. So, the as we start in the lower leftand corner there is a dash blue line that is going to be the Jerry Smith trail head connector. That project is funded through a federal grant in in design as well. We've been coordinating with that project that TMC is also managing. As we approach um Immunen Road there, what what's not shown on here is the now existing roundabout at Immun Road and Immun Parkway, but there there is a multi-use path connector over to the the existing trail and then the new trail on Immun Parkway. So, that's what you're seeing in the solid blue there. The four tag trail will provide a pedestrian hybrid beacon crossing. that is a the one like the one at um Marina Heights Drive where you push a button and then you get a signal. So that will be um how the bikes and pedestal get across the street and then they'll continue through the open space parcel working their way over uh the main trail will connect down to 8th Street which has a future connection along 8th Street as part of the four tag trail um and then works its way up California Avenue. We recognize that several people are are already using a connection to 9inth Street through this area and so we are providing a little lake to get over there, but it's not part of the main trail. So the the the trail will navigate up California Avenue providing a connection at the existing path at 9th Street in front of the equestrian center and work its way north to Imun Parkway. Um, I should mention all of this area on California Avenue, I'm sure you guys know, is is currently uh they're they're planning for widening the road and finishing out that section of California Avenue that is an adjacent to project to ours and then we are building the trail next to it. So, the widing of California

um ideally will be done before this trail goes in. Then um there'll be a connection at 9inth street and then we will provide a ramp to connect over um at Beacon. When we get to Eng Parkway that is also an an adjacent project to ours. So there will be protected bicycle and pedestrian elements of the new signal and turn pockets that are going in there when that when that signal is redesigned. So we've been coordinating back and forth with that team as well. From there, the trail takes off on the west side of California Avenue heading north through the Cypress Nles area. Um, as we developed this alignment, we looked for the the largest thing over here is the grade changes kind of dipping down and coming back up. We worked with the city. The city has also envisioned a future fire station at some point in this area as well as there is now a cell tower at the intersection of Third Avenue. So, we had some constraints to work with. We generally provided a trail that is separated from the path, separated from the road that's more comfortable for all ages and abilities. Um, and attempted not to dip down too far and come back up. That makes it hard hard to ride and walk. Uh, so we go through the open space over there and then work our way up to Patton Parkway. There will also be a connection to the pedestrian hybrid beacon at Marina Heights Drive through that.

Thank you.

And the bike path that is along um Patton Parkway today. At Patton Parkway, there will be a a push button for a rapid f flashing beacon crossing to get cyclists back onto the class 2 bike lanes. Um pedestrians will be able to continue north onto the sidewalk, but the the bikes will get into the class 2 bike lanes. We are putting in a small portion of um connecting the bike lane in that area as well. Um as for other crossings, there are also two crossings that we're proposing down on 8th Street to connect to CSUMB and those will be uh there's a pedestrian push button um by push button at that intersection there with California and 8th. Okay. So, with that proposed design, um, as Phil mentioned, we're there were originally 56 removals, um, and 38 trees that will be impacted but protected using the guidelines that we've put within our plans provided by our arborist. Of those, here's the breakdown of what those trees include. And next slide, please. Um at the tree committee they asked us to take a second look at trees that were over 24 in diameter at breast height that were coastal live oak monterey cypress trees um and Monterey those are the those are the two right am I forgetting one okay

um and with that we found these eight trees and we were we looked at opport opportunities to try to save any of these and we found one that we can um protect with our our tree protection measures. So, next slide. So, that brings the count down to 55. This is just kind of showing what how those recounts worked out. Now, why are we asking to pay the inloo fee? Um the any area that we're going through, as I mentioned, is potential Gileia habitat, which is just not compatible with replanting trees in this area. So, um we hope that we can find a way to use those funds and plant elsewhere. I think that's pretty much it. So, thank you. And um there's a link to our project website here. And if you guys have any questions, we're here to answer them. Thank you very much for the presentation. Right. Um I guess before she sits down, there any questions for her that you all have first? Maybe we'll just have you sitting down and standing up and sitting down standing.

Yeah, no worries. Go ahead, Commissioner Chang. Right. Thank you, Ch. And uh you mentioned that the u 55 trees will be u taken down and will be replaced and you you mentioned will be blunts elsewhere. I that is elsewhere. Could you define it? That that is up to the city. Maybe Phil you can answer that one. Uh so our tree removal ordinance allows um in lie of planting on replanting on site when there are constraints that the applicant provide uh an inloo fee that would go into the city's mitigation bank to locate add other sites to replant the trees on.

That would be the same thing I think Mr. chain is similar to what we've done on some of the other developments like surf where they we place some trees on the site but then others we've set aside the money and like at the plane commission side specifically for surf we actually asked the money to be separated and segregated specifically for the Delmani reservation corridor only but so the money just is going back to the city into a setside fund for tree mitigation and tree planting in the city

I know there's um the money for that I I just thinking and whether we could have the u you know the replanting of a tree within the same neighborhood instead of not defined elsewhere it could be outside the neighborhood I mean if I remove a tree in in this area I like to have another tree replanted in the same area can can we do yes so I think let's let's bring that staffwise let's table that okay then come back to that com that question internally for internal discussion

because we could put a condition on the that we want certain percentage of that to go back to the for example along a street right there in the open area that's closer to the street that's outside of the project area so put like street trees to kind of line that area because that's a pretty barren intersection area right so I think when we come back and we can talk about that but yes the answer we we can do that we can set that up as a condition thank you Yes.

Thank you, chair. Um [clears throat] 28 miles of trails um of which this is 2.1 miles. How many years are we looking at for completion of 28 miles of trails? I we we don't have a direct answer for that at this time. If you want to speak to that, Yanuk. Um the TMZ is attempting to fund one section at a time as they can. Yeah, that's right. We're we're um pursuing grant funding as we can for each segment. Um and so uh yeah, we don't have a an ultimate time period yet unfortunately. Yeah, funds are limited for this kind of thing.

This section for the construction? Yeah, our target is to begin construction in August of this year, 2026, and complete uh within two years. [clears throat] Thank you, Chair. I just have one question. Can you give us the average cost per mile for this trail or a approximate cost per mile? So far

this segment of oh of the well this segment of trail is 1.4 miles and the total cost is $10.2 million. So $10 million a mile. [laughter] Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. Um I have I'll withhold my my comment to later. I'll let the public speak first. Right. So, thank you so much. Shouldn't let you sit down. See what it comes back to. Uh at this point, we'll go ahead and open it to actually I think I'm going to open it this time to public comment online first.

Okay. If there is people online. Uh I don't see anybody's raised their hand. Chair Woodson. All right. Going once. Going twice. So I'll come back to it in a minute. Try one more time. So now we'll open it to public comment here in the audience. Have all these people. It's just emotional support today. Okay. So I'll go back one more time. Nobody has had now chance to wake up on the online. Uh that's correct. Chair Woodson.

All right. All right. We will go ahead and close public comment on this. Little bit different than when you were in Canyon Delray. Frog [clears throat] pond was a little more contentious u than this. All right. So coming back to this my question or comment um I guess it's I understand the alignment on the engineering side. and understand where you chose and it's a my kind of issue I've been think kind of debating in my head is where do we get to Gileia aside how do we get to the the alignment of the path and this is not about the alignment this is about the the trees themselves and so it's I'm kind of bringing it back to alignment wise and I guess maybe we didn't I'll just take it that over the last couple years we've had a couple of information briefs, but we were never asked to provide comment. But now all of a sudden, we're getting asked to approve the tree permit on something that we had no input on the alignment side of it. And there I there are questions on the alignment. And that's that's where my frustration is. So I'm not going to really address them. I'm just going to say that that I personally have some some comments that I wish that we had been asked to provide more support and asked on the site visits before we get to a point where oh hey, by the way, here's the tree permit removal. And that's really what we're supposed to be focusing on today. And so I think that as you move forward and you look at the other areas and the other sections of this, just kind of keep that in mind that that some of the commissions that maybe at the time we didn't realize that we would have to be there, but maybe on side of judgment of involvement in engagement with us instead of just here's a presentation. Um, I think that's it. A lot of it's because I've been around here probably longer than than most of the commission right now. And so I've kind of watched this process develop over the last few years. Um I still am concerned on just the alignment. Um

I think it's on the tree removal. It's this the section between Patton Parkway and MEN and ensuring that that what we are removing that that really is the best path because I know that we are it goes in 100 ft from the road and then it has to come back out because of the third street cell tower and then it cuts back in and at the same time we're trying to keep it off the main bike path that's already there. And I think I just wanted to understand some of the logic. I know you talked about you want to keep people you want to keep access in a safe kind of direction. So instead of on the highway, you want on the roadway. You want to open up to everybody so they don't have to worry about the bike path with the traffic next to it. I mean, outside of that, I just some of the logic behind just the alignment decisions. Um, if you don't mind kind of giving us some of that background on that because we just we weren't involved in any of that discussion. Yeah. Um, we I don't know if you can pull up that section of the map. We created a a set of slides that are kind of the parking lot if you will at the end of the presentation.

Sure. Um, and that would be probably so in those map those map ones at the end here or Yeah, we'll keep going from here. So, this these are snapshots from our uh tree removal plan that you guys have a copy of. Um, so moving forward. Yeah. One or two more.

Yeah. So this so this is where it starts if you go one back. So the the vision for for tag was to go through um and connect through greenway areas to connect people with open space. So generally that's what we're trying to do is create a path that is off street away from the street. We obviously have these constrained areas where here we need to connect to the intersection. It's a steep slope drop off. So we're kind of hugging the road there for a while. Then we have an opportunity where there's actually an existing dirt road to hop off and kind of veer away. There's also a a storm water basin in this area. So, we needed to get behind that. So, then we come to the next sheet. Um, zigzagging kind of on that existing dirt road that's there. And then again as that starts to cross over um California then we kind of veer down and stay away from the road as much as as we can. And then we end up needing to hug the road because like you mentioned the cell tower is there. This is where um originally potentially the city envisioned a fire station sort of in this area off of the south side of third was one of the constraints at some point. Um there's also a storm water infiltration area that is down below where our trail is going to be connecting on third

kind of so and this is the one of the areas right here. So yeah looking at it directly across from almost direct dead center we've got the tree removals where the the path is relatively straight a little bit right there. And so for me it's it the it comes down a little bit and then it makes kind of a slight left hand and then hangs goes straight and then drops a little bit to the right. Um is it feels like if we went from an alignment perspective, why not go or is it just that that if we went further in and straightened it out there, you end up with trees on the other side

that Yeah, exactly. So, our arborist went out there and surveyed all the trees that are directly in the footprint of the project or right adjacent to if you've ever been out there, it is like tree city. There's a ton of trees out there. So, it's kind of a trade-off of like if you move the path over this way, you're going to be hitting other trees. Um, I will say we did look at an area um that was kind of where you see that really dense grouping of trees um just to the north side of Marina Heights Drive uh in between some buildings there. There were a couple of dead trees that were in that area. And so we're like, "Oh, is this an area where we can zigzag in and kind of get through this dead tree area?" Um but grading wise, it doesn't make sense. uh because we'd need to be down lower where that storm water infiltration area is. As well as um there's just a lot of other trees in that area. So there's just kind of trading here for there.

No, I get it. And had we started this 25 years ago, it would have been almost open because over half of those trees didn't exist. I mean, that's how fast they because of the way the water infiltrates off the road. It's a very fast growing area. And that's I mean most of that those area if you go back you look at the photos from when Patton Park before I imagin or before California was even made a cut through that was all very open area. So these trees have propagated themselves nicely over the last few years. Um so I think that that was my one and I think you explained you kind of explained the if you go to the next slide Guido which I think takes it to the end. Oh one more. Yeah, we focused in on this area, but there should there is one more sheet. Yeah.

Yeah. The next sheet is the corner. I think now when you did the presentation, that explains a little bit of this the rolling the curves right there. I didn't quite understand that when I was looking at it. Yeah, there's a storm water basin that's on the street side that we need to get around. Um and then we there is a Gileia patch to the north side. So, we kind of curved in between two of those. Yeah, I was surprised I didn't raise the GIO was right there right inside that base boundary there.

That's one of the that there's a house was a h quad that's directly to the north of the blue line. That was one of the houses that was burnt. So, um, all right. I those were my my big questions that I had. It was more just kind of an understanding of how we kind of got from two years ago to today and how we got here. Any other questions from the group? I really only have one staff question and that is with respect to the tree committee resolution where it says that there they've approved 56 trees. I'm wondering if that should be 55 or if that's just what it was before the decision was made. Is that 105? Is it? [clears throat]

Yep. Um the tree committee resolution would say 56 because that was the number that went before them at that time. Um conditional time, right? Uh yeah. To reevaluate and see if you could say more. Just making sure it was accurate.

Is this appropriate time for just comments or were you still in questions? Um, initially looking over this entire plan, I was perplexed to begin with and then I went over it a couple more times. Uh, since that time, I've I've visited and walked the site and looked around and saw quite a quite a nice greenway through there. Lots of trees and lots of nature and birds and everything. And um [clears throat] after that I just had a I don't know if it's a philosophical question I'm asking myself or whether it's something else but we're going to create a greenway so that people can walk in nature amongst the trees but we're going to tear down 55 trees in order to enable that to go through. Um, I don't know what the other 28 miles looks like as you know in in this regard. Um, but my comment is is it's kind of an imbalance for me and and $55,000 worth of new trees somewhere else doesn't doesn't seem equate equally for me. Um, so I'm I'm going to have to give this a lot of thought be before we vote tonight. Commissioner Chang.

Thank you, Ch. [clears throat] Well, first I want to have to say I just moved in here two years ago and um and surprised to see this tech uh projects I think connecting within the city and uh for 28 months and allow people to walk from one city to another city. And uh my my question is this the uh when I first heard about removing 55 trees kind of scary and but again I thanks to TMEC willing to provide funding for replanting so it's a is a good things and uh so my my question is um will we have a tree audit committee after the removing and replanting so just to make sure those tree that we retain are able to survive. and still able to have those tree around and uh have a audit team to go around and check on all the trees and just just a suggestions and u the the other thing is the u I do not know the time frame of [clears throat] this project the for uh we are talking about tree removal right now and uh so what is the next thing we need to do and uh have the community been involved for and uh how do we get a committee involved and let them know what we are doing. So it it'll be nice to have a kind of timetable that at least the residents who are affected they know what's going on and I think it's a very good u program I'll say you know in connecting all the city together and uh because eventually it come to design of the trail I think it's good that committee involved in it they they want to see how the trail being done and any restroom any lights straight lights uh for safety reasons

you know, so that's my thought. Thank you. Okay. Anybody else? Mr. Ron, do you have any questions, comments?

Small question. Yes. uh this area the Parkway and California Avenue there are other plans also in the this area other development plans. What is the impact of uh this project on those plans which are going to be their way because there is development going to take place in that area such I don't I mean don't think I think that's a I think that's a staff question but I believe that there's for anything are you referring to the Cypress Nolles area for any of that area there's going to be a setback from California Avenue as I understand so this project was always envisioned to be within this the setback area between the development and the roadway Okay.

And that development uh it has been taken into consideration that this project is upcoming and they know about that. Yeah. I when when we eventually do the master plan for Cypress models, we will clearly take the four tag issues into consideration. So yeah, and I would add the same thing with fire station. And I think the the latest draft on the fire station is is actually going to move from third up to the tenatively potentially the corner of Im. So then it would require reconfiguration right there a little bit but that would just be part of the construction.

Yeah. Well, those are good points. We we will definitely have to work with the forte folks to address those issues. So okay, thank you.

Anyone else? Okay. So, as you can see, um I mean I'm not the only one. I mean this is it's it's a really I've been thinking about this now for a week. A lot spent a lot of time thinking about this issue and um I get how we got here agree with it. Um because I think we've we've been put into a interesting kind of dilemma of having to approve a a tree permit to remove something which passently then for means that we as a commission completely agree with every single part of the design even though we had zero input or even weren't even asked for our input into it but yet we're asking to approve the tree the tree part of it and so I think my concerns are from you've got you've kind of heard it from four four of my fellow commission ers of where the challenge we we have are. Um, so I I I just don't think we can do anything about it, but I just want you to really emphasize that this is this has created a probably one of the more intractable thought processes for most of the commission that we've had to deal with over the last couple years. Um, for something that shouldn't have been a reason. That said, um it has been approved. The city has pushed this forward and so we do have it before us and the tree commission has approved this with conditions which they met. So that's how we are. That's where we're at today. Um so the motion before us is do we approve or disapprove the tree permit? Um I do have one more question. Chair Woodson is is there a opportunity for staff for the forte tag people to answer some of the questions from the commission? Is that possible?

Absolutely. And I had a staff question for you also. Okay. Um maybe let me ask let me ask yours because that may frame the answer to their if they want to provide any input. And so the answer would be that if for whatever reason something it did not pass today then what would where I don't even know where things would go this point. What would be the I don't even know where it would go. Um um hopefully that alternate universe we don't have to step into. Um hopefully we can address those issues today. So uh we'd obviously have to work with the Portag folks to address whatever issues you have concerns about. So that's why I was hoping to Okay.

be able to address but you had a question of staff chair Woodson. Yeah. No, fair enough. Um, so I think really if there were there any other No, that was that was my staff question. Okay. So, um,

um, so to address Commissioner Chang's question about outreach, uh, yes, we will certainly work with the Forag folks in terms of publicizing this and continuing to work with them. Ed's on the call. He's been on the project for the whole 12 years he's worked for the city. Um, in terms of uh potentially using the funds and where it would be replanted and all that, we can certainly uh we have a PR firm the city has hired recently that we could definitely promote opportunities to use the funds that they're going to provide for different replantings. Um, in terms of the development, we answered Commissioner Rana's question about definitely being mindful of the Cypress Null's development, the fire station. I think those were the two main questions. And then Commissioner Jacobson, I wasn't clear about your concern about the $55,000 that are you wanting us to potentially look at that number again, work with them, or what what would be the potential condition you would add?

I I would rather see a plan for trees somewhere in the city. Now that's two for one or whatever the normal process is rather than money going into coffers. That's all.

Okay. Um that can be certainly part of the motion. I understood from the fortech folks that planting on the trail would not be limiting. But if the motion is to work with for tag to identify if a portion of the funds could be more towards replanting that's that can certainly be part of the motion just not part of the actual trail if that's foreseeable. I think it's it's our understanding that this inloo fee would yes go into coffers but that it would be and we can support you and in any way you need support but it seems like that is a decision at the city and between at the commission level um about where those trees are planted. Am I?

So, so the question is if the commission were to put a condition on the motion to say directing staff to work with the forte group to potentially and I don't want to put words in the commissioner's mouth, but uh instead of just paying all of the money if there's an opportunity to replant trees in other parts of the city so that we would subtract from the $55,000 and then identify ways to replant certain number of trees. Is that a fair summary, Commissioner Jacobson? That's a fair summary. Okay. I think that that's what the motion he's trying to build. Okay. So, the question is, is that possible to work with us on? Yeah.

Yeah, we can work with you. Yeah, for sure. Yeah. So I think the the my comment on that one contrajects and is that usually when we put a condition on a two for one they're replanting there usually is it's a planting plus some level of maintenance support afterwards

and I'm not sure if we create a random spot and there's not a watering capability there's not so if I go back to the example that I was thinking about if we put let's say a half dozen trees along a street right there that we don't have running water to that area and so how would we how [clears throat] would we promote the growth of that and I think that that becomes a it working with them is is fine and and I'm fine with adding a I am fine with adding a condition that if we can find areas within the near vicinity of the construction site that we can do that but I don't want to also create something where we plant we plant trees to plant trees in in that area without ability [clears throat] to support that and then five years from now those trees.

Yeah. I I was thinking more [clears throat] areas in the city, excuse me, that could um be improved through trees. So, for an example, by the library, they've been trying to plant those coastal oaks, right? And they don't survive. And so this may be an opportunity to put it, you know, whatever a 15 or a 24 inch. Yeah. So as long as the city and and from a staffing perspective make a condition that we would rather we would like to to try to to see maybe 25% of the of the funds set aside to be used immediately and the other 75% put aside into the in the coffers.

But that the the execution of it can be used any place within the city boundaries based on the public works and standards. where feasible where feasible where feasible where needed. Yes,

I think that would be logic more logical than say that near vicinity of the construction site itself. The other reason I'm not sure about the new construction site is that some of those areas around there are still sha property development areas and so there are still future growth development areas there and I don't necessarily want to not improve that area but if we're if there's going to be future construction there I don't want to go ahead and improve the landscaping there to then have it have to be worked around and and taken out and then have to be put back there Any other open items? No, I'm trying to write the motion so the commission can Okay.

Except if you give me a minute, Chair Watson. Should I time you for the minute? [clears throat] I I actually would promote 50% rather than 25. I don't know. Okay. Where's the commission stand on a percent if we set aside a a percentage of it, which I'm fine with. 50% is fine. 50%. Okay. You So you think Oh, go ahead.

I mean that that incuffs the the city and several departments to to immediately find the place for $25,000 worth of trees. I guess it means what's immediately I don't know. I don't think that's immediately but should be recent one year one.

So I think that's where I would I would go back and that's why I'm thinking that's why it proposes 25% within one year. Um I think adding a time frame within one year I think that one year of the start of construction so that that they're not constrained to one year from today. It would be from the day that they break ground. Okay. 12 13 trees. Yeah. They said it's a two-year build started in August. So that would be it's you're saying within one year or we just say between during the construction period during the construction period. So that gives them two years. Okay. I mean I'm not I don't want to I don't want to restrict it. I don't either

and and say I don't want to put something that's owners. I say oh this is a phase thing. The trees have to come first. But yeah, if we said during the construction period the intention is 25%. Or but that's on the city not it is on the city. Yeah. Right. Well the 25%. Okay. So are we putting the condition that it's it's on the [clears throat] are we going are we asking are we asking for tech the planting or are we asking how would we normally do it with the developer if we said you had to replace them two for one

and it the developer is responsible for a two for one they're responsible for the site of the two for one on site if it is in lie of payment then they pay the city and the city becomes responsible got it generally even though we've Every so often we have made conditions that if it's an inlua payment, we've asked them to come back and provide maintenance support a couple times. Yeah. So we we've given kind of all three options in the past. I have a I have a draft lang.

So why don't you read the draft of what you think? Um so the the the base motion is there and then just trying to work with the commission that the applicant would be required to work with the city to identify if feasible if 50% of the mitigation fee would will go towards but replanting of trees in the city within the 2-year construction period. So that's approximately 27 trees over two years. That seems reasonable. Go on. Sorry. Can you repeat the question? No, actually. So, if you read the bottom, the second paragraph, that becomes the con that's the condition that Widow just discussed,

right? So, is that and I I think Widow on the two-year construction period, again, I don't want to I don't I don't want to say construction is going to be faster or slower, but I would just say during the I would say during the planned construction period. I am a little unclear what the responsibility of TAMC would be in this condition. And that's but you would work with us to identify potential using the $27,000 to identify trees that we could plant within the city of Marina. Work with you to identify trees. So this is

work with the city of Marina to identify places to plant trees that are reasonable based on your arborist recommendation using that $27,000. So if we go out to the library, I think the commissioners already mentioned that the co life oaks are not working out there. So obviously we wouldn't recommend that. So we would use the portion of the money to to buy the trees. You would buy the trees and then we would work with you to plant those throughout the city of Marina. I think that's what the commission So and I but I think what what she's saying and I and I can see it is

I think the option is that we want we just want a commitment to spend 50% up to 50% of the funds during the period of performance of construction. I don't necessarily to I think to the point that you're making I don't necessarily know that we don't want to add a condition of what is best around to support for tag kind of vision statements of of bike paths. Let's say for example that we want it there. I don't know if it we necessarily need to tie it to for tag as much as I need we want to tie it to the city. Will that's fine. You can give us the cash and we'll identify places to plant trees. I think that that I mean that's that's totally fine. I think I'm I'm fine with that. That was the impression that that in

we're asking for tagg to come in and understand our city and where the best places are to put 50 trees. And I don't necessarily know not that not that arborist can't do that because that's what he does. But I think in this case this the the real intention is that we are not just banking the money that we want to make sure that half of the money is used and that it's used during the construction period. Okay. Understood. Sounds good.

So, okay. I guess maybe I just completely misunderstood what the in lie of fee was for. And it sounds like, and you can correct me where I'm wrong, if they give you 100% in in cash, it's it's going to go in an account uh maybe a general account or something and maybe not go toward trees. And so we need

No, I mean, it goes in I So, let me just back up. So, when we started the conversation, Commissioner Jacobson expressed concern that $55,000 to just remove 55 trees would potentially not be, and I don't want to put words in the commissioner's mouth, didn't seem like an equitable uh removal of trees. And so then the commission got into a discussion about well what's a fair way to make up for the significant loss of the urban forest and then we're in this discussion about so I guess

well let me let me so so then the question is okay if if we if we take the money and it doesn't just go into the general fund there is a dedicated account for these trees that we put the money in. So then the question is to make up for the loss the urban forest uh instead of just paying the the money that the city now that I'm understanding what the commission's saying that within the next two years that we would take the money and immediately try to identify 27 places to plant the trees. So that that's that's that's where we're at as of right now. That's my understanding.

Okay. So uh so my question I guess was maybe I didn't get it out clear enough what I'm asking is the city would not use 100% of those funds the inla funds to replant to find and do this work on their own and find the places to plant those through the chair when the inloo fee is accepted it's put it into a dedicated account for tree replacement um so the entirety the 100% of it should would be used to replace trees not So, so your ask is that that work go back to Tamy as opposed to

No, my my my proposal is that $55,000 goes into the tree fund. It could sit there for 30 years. Got it. So, we're losing 55 trees. So I would like to see 50% of those replaced during this construction period whether it be two years or three years. Thank you so much. You're welcome. [laughter] And I think and to kind of add on that right now we have I think about 250 $300,000 in our tree fund from deferred payments that have been made over the last few years. So what we're trying to do is say let's speed it let's speed up the execution of that a little bit.

Yeah. Thank you for the clarity. St. John. Yeah. Uh, Guido, I have a little problem with your wording. I that you're on the commission. You guys can change it. I was just trying to help you guys out. So, whatever wording, it's really for the commission. I think you just fixed it for me. [laughter] Trying trying to do this on the fly. So, just trying best we can. So

I think the the our city regulations allow a replanting at two for one or a [snorts] uh mitigation a fee. That's correct. An inl of replanting fee. And it was agreed [clears throat] that the enlarging fee for this tree removal permit would be $1,000 per removed tree. And that's where the $55,000 comes.

That's correct. But but the I don't think the the ordinance or the wording goes any further than that. saying that, "Oh, and by the way, you have to work with us on finding a spot a a very good spot for the you to spend the money." And then that's why right now they just pointed out like the way the way I originally had phrased it. They correctly pointed out well how does that work out and where do we so that's why right

the commission is well then we should just have staff identify where to put those trees. Right. Right. So I think you've got it written more clearly now. Appreciate it. Thank you. So if I if I can just ask for clarity. So this is not a con proposed condition on the permit to TAM because we're not obligating TAM to to have any involvement in this is like direction to staff. Right. Right. Right. Right. Yeah.

Okay. So it doesn't So the motion is just is just stating the commission's intent. It's just memorializing this direction to staff. I I no it still become so it becomes a I believe it becomes a condition of the permit but in this case because it is with the because it is being tasked the condition is not the condition is on it's on the city to to perform not TMC I get what you're saying that's a good point that's a good point it's a

I I mean I just I mean, we're we're going to follow whatever the commission tells us to do. We understand the intent. We'll work with uh the forte folks to implement it. We understand the intent, which is to plant trees, if that's the intent of the motion from Commissioner Jacobson. So, so Seph, if understanding the intent that we're trying to to get across here from the commission, is there a different way to word this that satisfies you on the legal side?

You could do it a couple ways. I mean, you could, what Widow, I think, just said was, you know, staff takes direction sort of informally in these settings from the commission all the time. And I think he's saying you can trust staff to to take this direction and work with it. If you want to memorialize it, you can put it in the motion. Um, and it just states the commission's intent, you know, um, concurrent with approving the permit, but it doesn't become a condition of the permit that is, you know, an obligation of the permit, right? So would we could it you can leave it. You might want to clarify that the city, you know, the city will

Yeah. So if we did it this way, we have [clears throat] the recommended motion is paragraph one and then the second part would be concurrent to the motion the planning commission directs the city staff to so I mean I like the idea of adding the concurrent to that and I I and I do want to I do want to have it in the motion. I understand that I trust the staff, but I actually wanna kind of I want to I do want to memorialize this specifically because I it's not that it's precedent setting, but it it sort of is in some ways because we've been just we've been allowing this to just this this account to grow, which is nice. We have an account, but we're not spending it and we're not actually doing things with the money. And so we've been accumulating money now for a few years and we're not spending it.

Yeah. And the intent we're not planting trees. And the and the intention of the tree committee, which does kind of fall up [clears throat] underneath the plan commission, is that is to improve our landscaping habit and our our habitat and our environment. And so without memorializing it, we've just allowed this money to just get set into the pot. And thankfully, it's not being reeleated. But um so does the wording the way that he has it written would that would that satisfy the needs. Yeah.

I have a question on the first part of the recommended motion.

Okay. approving removal of up to 55 trees. Now that we've identified 55 trees, then this up to is kind of ambiguity should not be there. But the tree committee um I represent the the the commission on the tree committee and the tree committee requested that even during construction if they find an opportunity to save another tree that it's within their obligation. Okay. So the removal right now what we're not saying is that we're approving the removal of of 56 or you know 55 or more trees. We're saying up to 55 trees because they might save another one. It's possible during the two-year construction period, well, or early, you know, this summer to actually save another tree.

But so do you you object to the up to you want to take that out and make it an absolute why? It is that uh it leads to ambiguity up to but the ambiguity is in our favor. If they find a tree to save and it's only 54, I'm happy. I'm very proud and happy that they

So yeah, I mean I guess that that'd be my my point is I think as as Commissioner St. John has summarized what the the tree committee's findings are. I don't know if you had a chance to read their report is in the end the current design which is not at 100%. Is that there will be they have identified 55 trees at this point that need to be removed. If as they go from 60 to 90% design they realize that there is another tree that they can save it would drop to 54. So the idea is that they we can't remove more than 55 because that's currently what's been identified as as the trees to be removed. But if for some reason something can be saved, then we would remove that down and it would go to 54. doesn't mean that we expect that to happen at this point because I think the design is been mapped out pretty well but there is a slim chance and I think that's what the tree committee was trying to emphasize is that if there's any chance to save some additional trees instead of doing that we would rather save a tree than plant two trees but we have to start with a permit at a t is equal to zero and today we're the the t is equal to zero is 55 five as of the 70% design.

I don't want to force them to remove 55 trees if they don't have to. I guess that's the point because that's the permit. If it was an absolute number, then it's an absolute number, you know, but right now it is a it is a quasi number that's pretty solid, but we would accept it going down. that is in the favor all all parties uh benefit if it becomes 54 or 53. So I I say we leave it as up to I mean does that make sense or do you want to do you still because we can discuss it and and and see if anybody else wants to change it.

It does. And the next part is three subject to findings. Is it subject to findings or as per findings? Because finding are there subject or per to either way as per findings as per changing if we can change it to as per sure that's all as findings as the findings could put just z as the findings

I'm sorry Nothing. Nothing. Per is fine. All right. Any more comments, Commissioner Chang? Thank you, chair. [clears throat] Just to clarify, the uh $55,000 for 55 trees. Is that right? So, it's 54 trees will cut out to 54,000. Correct.

So, it's,000 per tree. Okay. the u the conditions um I I still feel maybe need to be more specific replanting of trees in the city and I I thought maybe you could add another condition is at least 50% of the tree and um of the replacement tree to be planted within half a mile of the project site. No, no. I I mean I would say no. Number one, this isn't a condition. It's just a caveat that's in the motion.

So a condition would be put on for tag or or TAMC. This isn't theirs. This is more direction to the staff to the city. Okay. So it's really not a condition. So I think

but the other thing is that there's plenty of there's plenty of trees out there where this project is taking place. So I'd rather see the the trees be connected other places in the city that would be beneficial to the city. Well, if if for the environmental um factors to be considered the u if I remove trees in that area, I like to see tree replanted around the area, not somewhere else in the city. So I deal avenue and I want to see tree planted in another part of the city.

So I I think I'm going to add to this. I I understand what you're saying and I'm the two things I'm going to add to this are [clears throat] number one I think we we it is endemic to think back 30 years to 1995 and this was the main connement area and the overwhelming majority of the trees that are in this corridor um even in the Cypress Nulls area we're not there

we're not there what's happened is we've had 30 years of undeveloped growth of the habitat and that doesn't it's not a right or a wrong that's just the fact of what's happened and so there are areas and I'll give an example if you go down third avenue from the this there you go down about a block there's a playground that exists that was one of the it literally is 90% overgrown now with trees and you can I mean it's like the playground the trees are literally overgrowing the the playground equipment now and that's what's happened with 25 years of growth. And so I think it's hard to envision what was there 25 years ago because especially you I mean you just moved here two years ago so you don't have that visual point of where things were before.

Um again it doesn't make it wrong but I think that thinking [clears throat] back to where the city is and where we're trying to do there are a lot of other areas in the city

where we don't have degrees right [clears throat] now that where we could make better use of it. Not that that area isn't good, but we're we've already got a saturation there. In addition, what's going to happen is when we get to Cypress Nolles, that's going to change that entire complexion of that area anyway. And I think what especially in the Cypress Nolles where a number of these trees are coming from are we're going to end up readressing the entire landscaping plan of Cypress Nolles at the time and there are going to be a a sizable number of tree issues that come up with Cypress NLES because it is become so overgrown

there. Again, it's not a topic for this tree permit, but I but I want to give you some context of the area. And then I think the same thing going along 8th Avenue. You've got the Gileia population that exists in that lowlying area between Arena Equestrian Center and ETH. There are very few areas that are within the city boundary that are owned by the city that make sense to do that. A number of the open areas that are around the 8th and 9th Avenue corridor that aren't developed yet

where we could replant trees, this is what I was saying before, actually still belong to Shay or belong to MTWD. And when we get to development there of those areas, that also is going to address the landscaping in those areas. And so if we we kind of try to put something within a half mile of that corridor on either side, we're we're kind of restricting ourselves to areas that don't necessarily may not provide the best bang for the buck and return on investment of the trees.

And I think that there are some other areas. The important thing is to that we're getting, I think, the best use of and planting of the trees that that most benefit the city. And I what we're trying to do is say we want the city to do that. And we trust that the city staff and more specific public works are going to come in and make that recommendation of where those are going to go. And it could be that some of them are right along that corridor. But I think we leave it open to the city because if we try to restrict that at this point, I think we're we're we're already restricting it by saying we want 50% spent. If we try to drive it even more, are we starting to hamstring the city? And that's not the intent. The intent is we want actually want the city to speed up putting the trees in. Okay.

But I mean that's I mean I think that's that's my vision of what I what I see Commissioner Jacobson's proposal. Gotcha. Thank you. Okay. Any other comments? All right. So, we have a motion in front of us. We've said our piece. Anybody want to make a motion? Commissioner Ron. Yes. I'll make a motion. Commissioner Ron said first. Oh, okay.

It's a second time tonight. You I just totally served you, Commissioner, but we'll let you second it. Okay. I move to adopt planning commission resolution 2025-13 approving removal of up to 55 trees as per findings conditions of approval and consistency with the project certified by transportation agency of mter mter county TMC in 2019 number 2019 060053 50% of the mitigation fee will go towards replanting of trees in the city within the planning planned construction period which will be an obligation of the city staff to implement.

I'll second the motion. Commissioner St. John seconds the motion. Before we hold a vote, I I just wanted to to give Guido a chance. Guido, were are did you want to recommend that this actually be a condition or do you think we've moved past that? Uh well, they've already made their motion, so no, that that doesn't matter. You can discuss a motion while it's on the table. Um I'm I'm just wondering if that if if you had an opinion given the recent dialogue that that should be a condition now or if it stands as part of the motion.

Uh I mean it's always my preference to make it as a condition so that the applicant follows through with staff. Obviously we work very closely with the applicants but it's entirely up to the commission. So, I just wonder if there should be if if if the second part of the motion here then should be rewritten to to, you know, clearly state whatever role the applicant has in in making sure that that piece occurs or or if you think it it it clearly states that already. Does the applicant have any responsibility? No, I don't I don't think we're putting any responsibility. Well, I think the applicant let me ask the let's ask the applicant.

I mean, let's All right. So, we pause this for a second. we open it back up reading how we have this written right now and and kind of understanding that that this goes back to some of the issues from before that we didn't get a chance to discuss a lot of this so we're kind of dealing with a lot of this right now um we know it's not just you what do you think um I mean maybe we could reiterate the inloo fee like the ordinance that allows for this as an option Um because in Yeah, I'm still I don't know how we would identify. Yes, Phil.

Yes. As the project planner, I would prefer that it remain a part of the motion and direction to the city staff because what TMC's role in implementing a condition of approval like that would be would be unclear. Um it's kind of once we've decided to accept the mitigation fee, it's then our responsibility to execute it and make sure that it gets implemented. And the direction I'm hearing from the commission today is that that needs to be accelerated based on the previous fees that we've already collected and make sure that they get planned in a timely manner. So if we if we did that and we added kind of a friendly amendment to this and said which will be an obligation of the city staff to implement once paid by Fort which then shows that they've paid us the city and then the city takes on that obligation and you're Again, [laughter] I could we could change this and go back and and have things discussions like frog pond.

It is the original move and accept the friendly amendment. Commissioner Ron, do you accept the friendly amendment? Yes. Okay. So, we have a friendly amendment has been approved. Commissioner Saint John, do you still second the motion?

I don't I'm having trouble seeing where the friendly amendment has been. He added once paid at the end. Oh, once paid. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, that's fine. Okay. So, we have friendly amendment. It has been approved and has been seconded. Commissioner Rana, yes. Commission, Vice Chair Walton, yes. Chair Woodson, yes. Commissioner St. John, yes. Commissioner Chang, yes. Commissioner Jacobson, yes. Motion passes.

Could have been harder. Could have been easier. Um, in the end, I think this the org trail across the board is is interesting. I think that it is good for our community. It will be once it's all built. Sometimes I have my I have a hard time getting a round construction in California and trying to rationalize 750,000 per tenth of a mile for a recreation trail. Um, that's a lot of money. Um, but that's just the way things are and I feel much more comfortable in the end. And I use Frog Pond as an example. The real one that I think about is the little spur block on Fremont connecting to the middle transportation hub that you added in. So this I think this entire section is better than some of the other compromises that have had to be made across the trail to kind of keep things moving forward. So thank you for doing this. Thank you for getting around to our section of it. I think we've been waiting, some of us who use the trail system had been and we watching how this goes have been waiting for it to get to our city and not just the main part in Monterey and Seaside um areas. So, and Canyon Delray. All right. So, that concludes the public hearing portion of it. Um I think we have a couple other things you you don't have to stick around unless you want to hear about about housing toolkit.

Thank you. Thanks. Thank you. All right. So,formational items we have tonight are economical housing toolkit and meeting start time.

Yeah. So, we have Bryce from RCON. As the commission's aware, we've been actively working towards knocking out as many of our housing element programs as possible. And I don't have the exact number, but I think this is program two 2.3 of our housing element. uh when we worked on our housing element, uh the commission added this program to our work plan to say what are some ways that the the city could help the development community by building housing but doing so in a more economical way. So that this is the research that Bryce has prepared and I'll pass it off to him.

Awesome. Thank you, Guido. Um good evening uh Chair Woodson and commissioners. Um my name is Bryce Haney. I'm a planner with Ringcon Consultants. Um here tonight as Guido said to present the economical housing toolkit that we introduced um back in August and uh again this is work uh as part of the city's uh broader housing element implementation efforts uh that are focused on making housing more affordable, more efficient to build and more feasible in Marina. Um so tonight, let's make sure my slides are advancing here. There we go. Um tonight I'll give a quick recap on uh the housing element implementation effort that uh Ringcon was tasked with and then I'll walk through some of the key insights of the uh economical housing toolkit. So the toolkit will include a summary of the or does include a summary of the drivers of the uh high residential construction costs. Um a set of modular construction techniques that are gaining traction in California and then some of the cutting edge construction methods that we see a little bit further out on the horizon. Um and then I'll discuss the role that uh local jurisdictions like Marina could play in supporting these new techniques. Um so once again this uh project was funded through HCD's uh REAp 2.0 grant which provides resources to cities to implement housing element programs. Um so Ringcon was tasked with helping the city implement two of these. So that's program 1.4 uh directing the city to encourage the development of [clears throat] uh housing on properties of faith-based and other institutions like uh schools and and community organizations. And then program 2.3 directs the city to explore the present uh information on innovative housing types and construction techniques uh with the potential to reduce cost and speed up housing delivery. So we're calling this the economical housing toolkit. Um the final product which is in your uh

packet uh is an engaging educational toolkit intended to inform city staff and decision makers on new construction techniques that may be utilized as new uh development projects come into uh the community development department. Um each construction method is presented in a consistent easy to scan format which includes a brief explanation of how that construction technique works, its main advantages and limitations and then the types of projects that it's best suited for. Um it's intended to be a a quick reference guide and it features links to further resources and uh case study projects. So, these two programs are an important part of the city's eligibility for the state's um [clears throat] pro housing designation, which gives the city an edge when applying to larger state grants for housing focused uh community benefit projects, infrastructure projects, public transit improvements. Um so, yeah, that's the general overview of the broader project and then we can get into some of the the details of the toolkit in front of you. So before we jump into some of those uh construction methods themselves, it's worth asking um why is it so expensive to build housing housing in California to begin with. Um there was a great uh study by the Rand Corporation in 2025 that compared uh the cost of construction for multifamily uh residential projects in California, Colorado, and Texas. And the differences are pretty dramatic. Um, on average, disregarding the cost of land, um, it costs about $430,000 to build a single market rate apartment in California. In Colorado, that number drops to around $240,000. And in Texas, it's closer to $150,000. So, we're talking about construction costs in California that are nearly three times higher uh here than they are in Texas. Um, so for affordable housing projects, that gap is even larger.

affordable projects in California cost uh more than four times as much as they do in Texas. So, what's driving these differences? Um first are the hard construction costs. That's basically the cost of material and labor to build uh the physical structure. Um hard costs in California are about 2.2 times higher than they are in other states. And uh some of that difference is the result of of higher standards that we can't really, you know, get around. Um and that you know is using more materials or specialized materials for seismic safety and energy efficiency. Um but other parts of that hard costs are similarly kind of intractable. Um hard costs for uh construction labor. So for market rate projects, labor cost differences explain about 10% of the cost gap between California and Texas. But for affordable housing um when prevailing wages are required labor can account for 25 to 35% of that difference. Um another kind of major factor are soft costs. These are um architectural and engineering services uh fees, financing, permits and development fees. So in California those soft costs are nearly four times higher than they are in Texas. Um, local development and impact fees are about $30,000 per unit in California, uh, compared to roughly $12,000 in Colorado and only about $800 in Texas. That's per unit. Um, in some California cities, those fees uh make up to more than 10% of the total construction costs, total project costs, and that's largely due to uh California city's reliance on those development fees to pay for infrastructure improvements that are required to serve the project. Um, so alternately in Texas, property tax, the property tax structure actually provides

funding for infrastructure improvements. So it's kind of uncoupled from development impact fees and individual projects. And then the third major factor um you know possibly the most important is the development timeline. A privately financed multif family project that might take um a little over a year uh or a little over two years from start to finish in Texas often takes more than four years in California. Longer timelines mean uh higher land carrying costs, more time to pay for uh labor and equipment on site, significantly higher uh financing and interest costs, and over the life of the project, those delays um compound and and push overall costs higher. Um so shifting gears now, um we can recap some of these uh innovative construction methods. Um so part of the solution to those those [clears throat] high housing costs and high um housing construction costs lie in innovations in the construction industry which have enabled developers to build housing faster with lower cost with less waste. So some of those methods that we're going to talk about um are commonly used today throughout the state. So those are flat pack cabins uh used for transitional and interim housing to combat homelessness. uh pre-fabricated and modular single units that are used for ADUs and some uh custom single family homes and then modular construction that's often used for large scale multif family projects. So looking ahead a little further out um we're seeing regulatory advancements that may allow single stair construction in California um which we'll talk about in in a bit. Um mass timber is another construction method that's gaining traction for larger multif family projects. And then there's even been some pilot programs using uh 3D printed uh 3D printing to rapidly build single family units. So we'll get into these construction

methods and discuss uh some of the advantages starting with flatp pack cabins. So these are um essentially pre-fabricated micro units anywhere from 64 ft for an 8x8 cabin to 200 ft. They usually have a steel frame with insulated composite plastic walls. Um, some of these units can be configured with bathrooms and all of the units will typically be fitted with heating, air conditioning, and electricity. So, there's multiple manufacturers of these types of units in California. Two of the biggest being um, Pallet Shelter and Boss Cubes, which have supplied uh, products throughout the state. And these are the lowest cost solutions that we'll cover today. The units themselves cost um as low as $8,000 per unit. And then um you know altogether these tiny home communities that you may have seen that utilize these units typically cost between uh $ 35 to $55,000 per unit to design and build. So um some of the advantages these units are rapidly deployable for disaster relief and transitional housing. Um they're small lightweight structures that can that they allow um flexible arrangements at high densities on on small kind of constrained sites and they offer secure longerterm individual living spaces um in comparison traditional in comparison to traditional congregate shelter models where you know a resident might not have a door or a private space to themselves. Um, so like I said, these are typically used in um tiny home village uh transitional shelters like the dignity moves uh tiny home village in Santa Barbara and the Serenity Homes uh in Baldwin Park. So these are communities that feature on-site security, shared laundry, uh bathrooms, shower facilities, um and they offer supportive

social services on site, usually operated by a local nonprofit. Uh so next we'll kind of scale up slightly and talk about um these permanent pre-fabricated single units. Um these come in two main forms. These are panelized units where flat sections uh of the structures are built in a factory and then shipped to the project site where they're assembled. And then volutric modular units where the entire unit is built in a factory and then uh delivered to the project site, you know, almost complete with, you know, internal finishes. and then they use a crane to to lower it onto the site. Costs for these type of units range widely from about $60,000 uh per unit to $350,000 per unit. And that just depends on the size of the unit, different finishes and configurations. Um so that's just the cost for the unit itself, but site prep work like foundations and utility connections are an additional cost that again very varies widely depending on the site. Um, like I said, they can be installed on site much faster than uh a traditional structure can be built. Uh, they're regulated under HCD's factory-built housing program um where the modular units are inspected at the factory and that kind of allows uh local building officials to limit their review just to the site preparation and final installation of the unit instead of inspection of the unit itself. So, another advantage of these is that many manufacturers offer um uh many manufacturers of the units themselves offer in-house uh turnkey services which cover the the design, permitting and installation of the unit. Um so, it gives property owners kind of a one-stop shop instead of working with many different contractors and and professionals. Um, this is a good time to discuss the

differences between modular housing and more traditional manufactured homes. Um, traditional manufactured homes are built to federal building standards which are established by uh the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Um, they have to include a permanent steel chassis that allows them to be transported easily. Um, and they're uh regulated by uniform national standards that override uh local building codes. So on the other hand, modular units are uh placed on permanent foundations and they're not intended to be moved. Uh modular construction is subject to local building codes including uh you know title 24 regulations for green building and energy efficiency. Um and then they're regulated as I said by the the California's um by HCD under the factory build housing program. And then as uh manufactured units are legally considered personal property like a car or RV, the modular units are considered real property like any other sitebuilt home. Um and lastly, these units are really flexible. They can be used as a single backyard ADU or group together into pocket neighborhoods or or uh you know clusters of smaller single family homes. Um and then prefab [clears throat] ADUs are already common across California. Um we see projects like the Valley View Senior Apartments in American Canyon. Um and they show that projects like that show that they can scale into these highquality multif family developments. Next um we're going to jump up in scale uh once again to look at modular construction for multif family projects. Um, so with this method, you know, entire apartment units are built and finished offsite in a factory and then stacked at the project site to form a larger building. Um, cost for these can be 10 to 20%

lower than a traditional build. That's not a super reliable number just because it depends on on uh site conditions and developer financing and all this type of thing. Um but again the real benefit for developers is the the development timeline and the predictability of that timeline. So um an advantage again with the modular uh construction techniques is that site prep work like utility connections and foundations can be laid while the individual units are built um offsite in a factory and then um you know builders can use that and and you know set a date for those units to be uh you know delivered to the site and the the building can go much faster than uh you know up to 50% faster than traditional site built construction. Um, additionally, because of the more precise factory construction, there's typically much less wasted material than uh traditional site build methods, which is an area of savings as well. And then um there's multiple manufacturers throughout the the US that serve um large scale builders in California. So, two of these are uh Gordon and Autoval. And then there's a smaller but still uh widely known local company called Harbinger based in uh Vallejo California. And all those companies have a proven track record of delivering uh multif family housing projects. There's several local examples of uh projects that utilized modular construction. um Parkside Manor and uh Hosiendas 3 in Selenus as well as uh multiple projects in uh San Jose and American Canyon. Um so yeah, these projects just demonstrate the value of modular construction as a a tool in the toolbox for affordable housing developers. Um and yeah, next I'll cover some of the latest construction methods that are

gaining traction in California, but may still be a little bit further out from from Marina. Um so one of the most exciting changes on the horizon is is reform around these single stair buildings. Um so currently the state building code requires two stairwells in buildings over three stories. Um that's intended to increase safety in event of the fire uh in the event of a fire. Um but numerous recent studies of buildings in uh New York and Europe have shown that single stair buildings are just as safe as two-ter buildings as long as certain uh safety measures are in place. So things like fireproof doors, pressurized stairwells, and uh and sprinkler systems. But there's some legislative reform coming in California. Um AB uh 835, which I believe uh passed in 2024, um directed the state to create uh building standards that allow single stair mid-rise apartment buildings by 2028. Um, so this is great because single stair buildings are often less costly to build um, just because of the simpler structure and the floor area that's freed up by eliminating a stairwell and those long hallways can enable uh, larger uh, you know, kind of family-friendly uh, apartment units with more natural light and and ventilation. So this reform could be kind of a real gamecher for these missing middle housing types where on smaller lots where um other building types are are infeasible. So here's just kind of a comparison example of a a single stair building and a and a uh a two stair building with this um it's called a double loaded corridor. Um so in the diagram on the left you can see that um eliminating a stairwell and these long hallways that are are shown in orange on the left diagram um you can dramatically shrink the footprint of the building while uh providing light and ventilation to each unit on two sides instead of one.

Um so another emerging technology uh is mass timber uh or cross laminated timber or CLT um which involves the use of engineered wood panels that can replace steel and concrete in uh mid to high-rise buildings. So mass timber buildings can be built um quite quickly taking advantage of some of those off-site manufacturing of the building components um that technique that we've been talking about. and they're environmentally friendly uh with wood harvested from sustainably managed forests which sequester atmospheric carbon. Uh mass timber is already appearing in California with projects like the kind apartments in Sacramento or the super bungalows in Los Angeles which are shown here. Um so mass timber construction can be cost competitive depending on the type of project but not as many builders uh have used mass timber or CLT in uh in smaller projects in California yet. Um, mass timber has been used in in quite large projects in the Pacific Northwest where um, you know, the supply lines of um, you know, timber and the CLT projects are are uh, much stronger. Um, and then finally, so 3D printed housing. Um, this meth method involves large robotic printers which extrude extrude a concrete mixture to form the interior and exterior walls of the structure. Um, companies like Icon, who manufacture these printers, are working with home builders like LAR to print the vertical walls of a single family house in a matter of days. Um, and proponents estimate that 3D 3D printing could reduce uh hard construction costs by up to 40%. Um, currently residential 3D printing is allowed in California on a case-byase basis via the um California residential code alternative meth methods provisions. Um, but the buildings require more thorough review by an engineer to ensure that the design and

materials can withstand um, earthquakes and other structural loads. Uh, California's first 3D printed home was built in Reading in 2023. Um, so it's still, you know, really early stages, but it's one to watch watch closely as the technology develops. Um, so what can Marina do? Um there's several concrete steps that can uh you know help uh make it easier for uh developers to use some of these innovative techniques. Um one would be pre-certify some modular uh ADU designs um and multif family designs that reduce that can reduce uh permitting delays. Um, the city can train staff on reviewing and inspecting uh factory-built housing according to HCD's uh typical standards. And then, uh, the city can codify acceptance of pre-fabricated products, uh, that meet the performance standards that the city typically uses for, uh, traditionally built structures. Um, the city can define and enable cottage clusters in the zoning ordinance. Um, and then the city could also promote the use of tools like SB9 or SB 684 to support uh small lot housing um you know on on the kind of smaller lots in in uh you know lower density neighborhoods. Um so to wrap up um yeah Marina has a great opportunity to lead on housing innovation uh pairing you know city actions with construction innovations in the in the toolkit the city can make real progress towards housing affordability and availability. Um so thanks for your time. I'd be happy to do my best to answer any questions. Thank you very much, Bryce, for that update. I think that was adding in I know there were a number of issues that were raised in previous commission meetings on kind of wanted to look at

some of those areas that you highlighted today. So, it's actually interesting to me. I mean, I was thinking about some of the modular pieces and how we could use them here and go back to trees that a lot of those a lot of the issues that we have in in those areas is we have a development that's opening up then sure we may have an open area that we can get heavy equipment into, but we can't necessarily drop a we can't just lift in a modular component. what even if it's a single story one into a lot of areas and that requires a heavy lift crane with a in some cases a very long span width that's going to be needed to to move those into position. So, I'm it's it's interesting when we look at the the8 to $10,000 cost, even if we went with a larger one, how does that rental because that rental becomes $10,000 a day for a crane to come on site. And for me, what I kind of wonder now is, I hadn't thought about this before. I think it's about once a month or once every two months, I'll just be driving out on one and I will see a heavy lift crane that's come down from San Jose. That's usually for a large scale building. And I'm like, and in my head I'm like, okay, what is that 50 or 70 ton crane sitting on route one doing? What are we building in area? Because that's a there's a lot of lift capacity on that and there's not a lot of places. So, I hadn't really thought about that until just now of, okay, well, I wonder if that's going to support these modular homes, whether it's ADU or whether it's something where community based. So there opportunities but at the same time it's like how do we how do you max how would we maximize those those savings because that that mobilization ex install cost becomes pretty significant pretty quickly.

Chair Woodson um if you want to open it for comment we do have an executive director of a housing group that he could probably provide some further input. So, thanks Guido for Yeah,

thanks for inviting me and Phil, it's good to see you again. Last time I saw you were capable of all of the county. I'm sure they miss you a lot. Um, I'm I'm Jeff Mor. I'm the president of Chief and obviously you know Oaks and Ranner. So, I've been president for about uh I've been president now for about two and a half years. Uh before that I worked on the first modular affordable housing community 100% affordable permanent supportive housing in San Jose. It was called Second Street Studios with Girden. And we're currently looking at uh some modular homes uh for transition age youth in partnership with the housing authority over in Solidad. Uh I think it's great uh that you're putting together a presentation to really look at this kinds of these kinds of technology and I can tell you that uh we put up a building with 135 units that the tower uh went up in two weeks uh instead of a year or two. Now there's always issues and quirks and I could go on and on about that but I think I have about a minute so I'll I'll end it there. But I I think it's a culture change, but I think it's definitely great that the city is having enough vision and foresight to think about the technologies because I think it'll really help.

Thank you. And I'm going to come back to um anybody else online who has a comment since I've opened it to public comment.

Uh I don't see anybody. Um and I I would just add so this also for the commission the the genesis also with this when um when we had that joint meeting with the city council gosh it's been almost three years now for Cypress Nolles one of the kind of directions we got from council was look at ways that you could build that missing middle housing with lowcost efficient um so when we eventually roll out the specific plan for cypress nulls this could be a potential option to very quickly and rapidly uh bring housing to the Cypress Nolles site. So I if we get to a point where we have a a approved vision. Exactly.

I mean I think that's the lynch pin right now that's holding up Cypress Nolles is besides demolition the $20 million still left to demolish everything is the bigger one is we don't have a vision for the build of what we want to put there. I think it's that's too small to just make a decision and too big to make a decision. So, we're stuck in between of okay, this is the biggest stop spot we have left. So, what are we going to do with it? Um, different conversation. I mean I think not three years ago but more importantly what eight months ago is when when you were well one of your staff was here and then um I can't remember the name of the other agency that was here.

I forgot I forgot but there was another we had a affordable housing meeting in May. and he I remember he sat cuz he sat back seat over. So I remember can't remember what his name was,

but I remember we talked about these issues again and the opportunities and and I think I've still come I'm still going to come back to our drainage retention basins of which we have 30 plus of them around the city of those are areas that I still think would be a great way to look on infield development. We can't do it in all of the areas because some of the retention basins are still being used as detention or detention ponds are still being used in a functional capacity for runoff, but a lot of those are not. And it really still seems like a a way that we could use to meet our reena numbers and at the same time increase our infill across the city. So, I will make that plug again that it would be nice if we could find a way to to leverage all these these infill spots that are literally owned by the city to to help meet our numbers. I mean, it's it's it's a blessing that quite frankly none of the other communities in the region have. Most of them have already filled in those detention basins that they had prior to the putting in their sewer systems and they've gotten rid of them and we still have them sitting out there.

You know what's funny? There was one on my street, Brett Bradley Circle. Um, it was rather large and I don't know how it happened because I just about moved there about this time. So, this was 15 years ago anyway, maybe 20. I don't think it's that long. But somehow probably 75% of that hole, I'll call it, got filled in. There's still 25% that looks like it's being used as a pathway and a modular home was dropped there and it's there today. Interesting. Yeah, the modular home was there and then they built the garage to attach the modular home. All right. So, I'm just going to strange staff action just because it's an interesting it's a more interesting one is if we could find out what happened with that parcel. I'm just curious now

uh if you can just get get with me after the meeting here but just I'm just now I'm just curious that if if that was part of the city's detention basin system and how that is still there says do not park here city right yeah I I can get the information after the meeting from the commission retired city employee just kind of dropped us home there

nobody knew Um, and then for the commission, Bryce did allude to, and Bryce, if you want to pull up the face base overlay uh slide. This is part one of two of uh Bryce is helping me. We did get some reap 2.0 money. Uh we do have quite a few faith-based properties in the city. And as one of the programs that uh Bryce will be helping me with that we'll be bringing back is an overlay zone to identify potentially uh using faith-based and religious and institutional type uses some kind of underutilized properties in the city um for potential housing. So uh Bryce and I will be I'll have to reach out in terms of when we'll be coming back, but that's another uh this is part one of two of a presentation from Bryce. So

yeah, cool. I think um Commissioner Rana and Vice Chair Walton just go in that order.

Yes, thank you chair. I have a question for the presenter that uh we discussed uh in the presentation drivers the cost drivers in California as compared to Texas, Colorado. I think one of the cost drivers is demand because California demand is much higher and it is based on the population density. California has 40 million people and per square mile the density is 250 m 50 people as compared to Texas 30 million living uh 110 people in the square mile and then there are other cost factors taxation and other issues these are the cost uh increase uh driving factors now I wish we could get a picture as to these types of housing, these improvements that we discussed. How much saving really it is happening on ground per unit when we use these methods because as we as I said demand driven because of demand higher cost of land is one of the big factors and even if we make the construction cheaper the land cost is a fixed factor which has to be taken into consideration. So that is one point that if we have a presentation of this nature

in future if you could see the actual saving in cost with each of these uh construction methods. Okay. And also we have real examples. There are certain type of housing the modeler housing and other types have come up in Selenas and San Jose and all that parate housing cost. How much saving has happened to the buyer?

Yeah, I mean I would have to defer to the affordable housing community on that. I think uh Jeff referenced a was it a 135 unit project that got built in two if you want. So in terms of cost savings you could imagine if that normally takes 18 months to build and it gets done in a month.

The the technology varies an awful lot and so it's a fairly new industry. Um, but the the advertised savings around it really depends. A lot of it's on the means and methods. You have to build modular housing to fit what the factories actually produce to create the right efficiencies. But, um, you can definitely save a lot of time. I know with the Clayton homes, uh, we're working with the city. the land component is kind of it's it's a it's a piece of it, but frankly it's the infrastructure and the delays and the hard costs that's the biggest issue for us. Um we save money because it's a factory built so it's not hiring trades doing wages at at the site. So the wages and and factory OS one of the modulars actually does prevailing wage with the carpenters union. So they actually do but it's just a different model. So, it's it's really hard to say, but but one thing I'll say, we're looking at some modules that we're putting up for about you could do about $90,000 from Clayton Homes. They have about 42 factories. So, they're single room, but they're very, very fast to build. And and so part of that, too, is you have transition age youth that are homeless now. Solidad wants to put those units up quickly. Um, so it's it's going to be more efficient, but I'm not sure that right now that the costs are dialed in where it's going to be a big difference. What I've seen, it hasn't been a big difference in the hard costs, but it's been a big difference in carrying costs if you think about financing. And also, we don't go through the same inspections, as he said, because it's all done by HCD. So, they're they're just done. the the manufactured homes and the volutric modular are are uh are are just evaluated differently and that's a culture change too. So that would be something the building officials would become more educated on if they haven't already. I don't know if that answers

your question but the technology is still evolving. Thank you. Vice Chair Walton. My question is for the staff. What what relationship do you have with um HUD with the housing and urban development people? Uh well, Darby came and spoke to the commission about the CDBG money that we're going to be getting. That that is money that comes from HUD. Um so, but HUD is more I don't normally get involved with HUD type work. So,

so is it is it possible? Okay, great. Thank you. Because my question is with while we're on the topic of affordable housing and and I love that we are working toward some kind of more affordable building standards, but the property like we talked about not too long ago is still very high. So you can go get a $300,000 house and pop it on a $700,000 property and still have to pay a million dollars to stay there if if I'm not wrong. So, so my question is with respect to HUD and some of that affordability um and the city, perhaps the city can develop a relationship with HUD, figure out how to buy some of those $1 homes that um only governments can do and start to um put that on the city so that the so that

people can buy those homes from the city directly deed restricted and all those kind of things. Sure. And can we bake that into a portion of this or uh Yeah, I mean that could be Yeah. And we could certainly take a look at that. Thank you. And we could also add it in as as part of general plan also. Thank you. Yes. So yeah, that that's

Sorry, I'm just thinking, hey, every six months we get up here and we have this great conversation and then it's going to be six more months and then in the back of my head I think we've made this great progress. We've had these great conversations on the planning commission and with the staff and we get great developers and people who have been working in the region and then six more months goes by and so I guess my question to Stag Guido is I mean you end up being the middleman between us and the commit and the city council and then it goes to city council and they have an agenda that is a mile long And the progress ends up being very slow, even though we would like to see it faster because, well, we're one-sided. We're the planning commission. Our site is, hey, development, zoning, build this stuff. It'd be great. Um, and then the council looks at says, well, we've got a thousand things. We've got parks and streets and budgeting and all these other things that are on the agenda. And so how do we how do we bridge not and I don't think there's an answer today. I know there's not an answer. How do we bridge this kind of definitional gap that exists between planning commission and what we want? And we could give you staff direction and that's that's great, but that doesn't necessarily solve the issue that it then gets hung up. How do we how can we work more closely with the city council to try to emphasize that this is we're not just a planning commission sitting here. This is a priority to us and it's it's something that we really would would like you to look at more closely than just okay, we'll put it on the agenda whenever we get to it. I like I said, I don't know if there's I don't there isn't an answer tonight on how to do this, but I think that that would be

if I had direction to staff tonight. I would I would like to to figure out a way because I I just feel like I've sat here and and over three years, four years now, I' I've listened to variations of this presentation get better, get more refined as the systems get better. But yet I then turn around and I look in the city and we're in the same part and we're at the same point and now we have an approved arena plan and we have a regional housing element and our timeline is ticking and all of a sudden we're going to be four years down the road and we're going to start coming up on writing the next arena and we're going to look around and say what did we do and we have these great ideas but how did we actually get them implemented? If we're looking at a 12 to 18 month turnaround time, then if you start back planning of what we have to do to get there, we're we're quickly eating into all that good that we've built up into our housing element on actually getting these things executed.

And that's so I I I would just politely say that I have a different perspective. I feel like the plan the planning commission and city council are actually being very progressive that uh the policies that you guys have helped implement have helped me apply for the pro housing designation which we're about to get which makes us eligible for PIP funding. I had a meeting with Rencon and other two Rencon staff members. If we're able to get that PIP money, we're going to actually be able to partner with affordable housing uh developers to rehab and preserve existing housing. Um but I I would strongly disagree that that these are not fruitful conversations because um you adopt these policies and procedures, the council uh uh approves them. We we got our housing elements certified. We're going to get pro housing. We're getting PIP funding which can then be used to work with the affordable housing community. Um, so so it's not it's not that we're not having fruitful conversations. The work that you're doing here, you might not see it because you're only seeing it every couple weeks, but all the work that you guys have been doing and the council has been doing is actually building towards other stuff that we're working on. So I just and then also these conversations have been fruitful because we were able to get PLA money and if you recall we had a gentleman who lives in Marina who works for HCD who came and spoke to the commission about two years ago. We used that PLA money to have pre-approved ADU plans which numeral a number of customers have used and uh that came about from these commission discussions. So, I would just say that I hear what you're saying, but there's been a lot that's going on.

I'm not saying that it hasn't been. I mean, that that's that wasn't my point. I Yes, I know we're making progress by getting the housing element done and one of the first ones in the county to get it reapproved as quickly as we did. It opened up grant money that first year that we were able to apply for that other counties or other communities in our area weren't able to apply for. So, we have I I get that completely and maybe that's the issue. Maybe it's maybe it's the idea of okay can are we do we have some place where we've put this together to say okay here are all the elements that we are here's at a high level here's our housing element here are all the things that become a byproduct a product on a kind of go to market kind of way of looking at things of what have we achieved based on that that these then keep building and this is laying the foundation for for this this then becomes a building block that opens up this this other capability. And yes, there is a point. You get to see it every day because it's your full-time profession and we get to see it for a couple hours, right,

every month. Yeah. And so we don't necessarily get a chance to see that and and then there's the city council that has their time and their bigger agenda. We are a small part this is a small part of a bigger how do you run a city? And so maybe it's just it's just the well I I can certain I um I I can certainly bring back to the commission in a couple weeks just kind of how how all your work has done is hit that I can I can certainly do that. I think it's just for us. I think it's also and I let him speak again. I think it's also for the community in whole so they can see how all this is how everything we're doing is not just hey we're getting better. It's how are we doing this and what are the results and what are these gates that are opening up and they're making it better. And it does not have to be in two weeks. Guido,

you know, it's kind of interesting as you were saying that and was listening to Guido. So many of the things that used to come before us no longer come before us because now it's just part of an administrative process because that authority has been shifted. So there could be things going on in this regard. Oh, and we don't know anything about it

actually. So that's a really good point. So in the last year, Allison and Nick before they both left probably worked on six or seven projects to your point that because the council and commission adopted objective zoning standards, those are now done at a staff level. And so in terms of to to your point, so maybe I need to kind of show all that. Yeah. And so for example that project that's going to get built off of Hillrest that 15 unit project that was project that Allison worked at a staff level it was a there was no public hearings and that normally would take two three years of public meetings to get through that got done in a year right so that's example like you're saying of maybe doing a better job of explaining to the commission right exactly so

so you had another comment well you kind of kind of an open public group I I I I don't know this is procedure, but it's just us. I I I just wanted to say, you know, for me, um the laws have gotten so much more friendly towards building affordable housing since I started this 20 years ago. And funding is about the only thing that really stops us. And um frankly, I've just taken a lot of satisfaction on each project at a time. And Jun say I know some folks who were homeless living in a car that got housed and I think one of them may have even testified here. Yeah.

So, I I kind of take my satisfaction one key at a time because there's never enough funding, but I think what you're doing with each individual project as it comes up on a on a case-byase basis and the speed with which you do it is having a real impact. And I can tell you in this community, it's having a big impact. And I [laughter] think that's what it comes down to, Guido, is that I'm going to go back to a different issue. I'm going to go to sea level rise. And so we Allison creates a sea level rise plan and we turn around we get it submitted to this to the state. The state comes back says this is great. We get it we get it approved and it's it is in some ways almost a gold standard for the state of this is what you should look like with a plan. And so we've been complimented about that. Well, we're doing the same thing as a community here. And we have a lot of people who care in the community and want to see this and they we we know about some of it. But as you can see, we have a very large audience here who is hearing most of the rest of it. But to that point, the city doesn't know that.

And the city doesn't know it, which which means that we're not necessarily doing a great job of marketing how well we're being successful to our own residents. It's not popping up with the media and the Monterey Herald or the Carmel Pine Cone. and it's not popping up in the bigger community across the peninsula. It's like, oh, it's Marina. Marina's just the northern suburb and they're kind of the blue collar lane is we're not part of we're part of Monterey Peninsula but are not really part of Mon. It's like no, you know something, we are doing things right

and there are a lot of things that the other cities talk about this is what they want to do or they don't want to do this or they they have problems with housing and tarpie flats or and all these other things that are coming up. Yet we are being very successful and we're overcoming those because we've decided that we could take two approaches to this. We could put our our hands up and say, you know, yes, but not really in our backyard, or we could take a very proactive approach and try to solve these issues and say, you know, we have to work together as a community to do this.

And I think it be really behoove us in the community if we can find a way. Again, I we have a lot on our plates, so I don't want to turn it into this, we have to have all these metrics and everything else we do, but I do think we we can do a better job of selling how does this all integrate together and what are the doors that have been opened just by the RENA approval process itself that it's not just okay, we get we got this approval for these housing units and this is what we want to do. It's like I don't know. It's opened up millions of dollars of available money that we are using to positively impact our city. I' I've spoken enough. I'll get off my podium. Any other comments from the group. So,

all right. That's information number one. Um, you had one more, I think, didn't you? Uh, the start time of the meetings. Start time of the meetings. And now we wanted to move that. Thank you very much. Thank you so much. Nice to meet you all. So, we wanted to move that. It's it's

so just just some context just because Se's on the call as well. So I double checked in the municipal code. In some cities I've worked for the planning commission and council meetings have to start at a certain time. That's not in our municipal code for planning commission. I double check with the deputy city clerkship. I said if the commission goes to go is there any No. So it's really a vote of the commission if you're open to starting earlier so we can all get home earlier to our families. So, and maybe I could entice the commission by feeding you guys more. So, so wow, I was going to go.

I do have budget for that. If you're gonna part of it, we can negotiate.

So, so not fullman, but you know, but so, but it it's really but also we want to be respectful of all the commissioners and if we need to stay till 6:30, we're here as staff to support the commission. No, I mean I I think I think we all have talked about it before. I think a as a group we had looked at being able to start a little bit earlier is feasible as long as we know it ahead of time. Um I go around I think what we had talked about well what would the last thing I thought was 6 but what was the last time what was the time we I know at one point we discussed even uh our study session started at 5:30.

So it long as we're consistent because when the staff puts in the legal notifications we just want to make sure we don't miss so I am fine with moving it to 5:30. What about the rest of the group? I mean, okay. Oh,

okay. So, what time would would six o'clock. Okay. Well, that's up to the Well, so what about the three of you? It's because you're retired. Well, I'm tired of being tired.

It's like my VA post that meets at 11 o'clock on Wednesdays in the morning. No, in the morning. And their rationale is that they're all so old that they don't want who wants them driving at night after dark. I'm like, yeah, but it's really hard to make it there at 11 o'clock in the morning. Um I don't know how some cities, you're right, some cities do this. They have their city council, their plan, their committee and commission meetings in the middle of the day. And I like, wow, that is I love the fact that ours is an evening and that even if we don't have a lot of people show up, we give them an we're giving people an opportunity that doesn't exist in a lot of places. So, um, so it sounds like right now based on the current commission, the way it's set up, which is the way it's going to go. And I I we'll ask your opinion, Commissioner W. I know you can

you can I know this is your next to last meeting, but I'll give your input on what you you can say like three o'clock I you know what works for you guys and with it in mind that there will be future commissioners with lives um who may have to work at until 7 during tax season and so to get off and be here at 5:30 wouldn't mean to lose money. Okay. But outside of that

so I think 5:30 so 5:30 sounds out for our commission currently right now. So that makes no sense to like hamstring our own commission that's in place right now, not knowing anybody else. So we're looking at moving from 6:30 to 6. Um I'm fine with that. I think that's that really kind of matches the city council anyway. They do close session starting at 6. We would just start our meeting at 600. So it actually aligns more to the city council anyway. Um sounds good. and we can always adjust it when we get the new commissioners and whatnot, but definitely appreciate the consideration from the commission. So,

all right. So, nothing else? Any announcements? Nope. And I So, I have an announcement. I guess I have one. Um, just as a reminder that um, under city guidelines, I come up on I have now reached the end of this month, my two-year official term because that's the most I can serve consecutively at a time. So, I can take a break and come back at some point potentially if the commission so desired, but I can only serve two years consecutively at a time. So, I'm out of that. So, next week, next two weeks at the next meeting, one of the things that we will have to do is nominate and select a new chair. So, and vice chair and vice chair.

Um, and so we need to think about that. And on the vice chair side, um, right now, just so we, so you know, um, so vice chair Walton's last meeting will be next in two weeks. Um, more to come on that in two weeks. But, um, on that side of it, what we can do and what we have done in the past is we have already deferred the vice chair selection until a new commissioner. and the new commissioner tenatively would be the first the meeting the first meeting in no in February.

So we can always make a decision to select one and then defer on the other. But what I want I wanted to leave you with is because I think the last couple years we've just waited until the meeting of is to give you some time to think about that especially if you are interested in serving as the chair. So that's my announcement. Um any correspondence? No. Right. I guess that's it. I really wish this duck would squeak. I'm going to change that in two weeks. Um, meeting adjourned. Awesome.