Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. Good afternoon, everyone. Thanks for your attention. Good afternoon. It is 04:31PM, and I am calling this meeting of the design review and preservation board to order. Now I do the gavel. Recording Secretary, please call roll call.

Thank you. Board Member Anderson? I'm here. Board member Bisbee

Present.

Board member Ennis Present. Board member Fagent Present. Chair Sharon

Present.

Let the record reflect that all board members are present with the exception of chair John Scarter.

Thank you, recording secretary. I have one addition to this item. One accessibility announcement from board member Ennis.

I just wanted to let you know that I am not listening to something outside of this room. This room is a little bit of a challenge for me auditorily, so I'm using this as an assistive device.

Thank you for that. Okay, yes, thank you very much. And this is a great sorry? Louder audio. Okay. Well, one thing we can all do as board members, and this is a reminder for everyone who's commenting tonight to please get as close as possible to the microphone, and I will do my best to do that as well. And our sound people, if there's any chance to increase any volume, we will. But we'll make certain to get as close as possible, but please remind us if you can't hear us. Thanks. And since oh, and actually, when commenting, the the lectern can move up and down as you're doing it too, so you can get very, very close to the microphone.

Moving on to item point two, remote participation under government code five four nine five three point eight. There are no remote participants. Item three, approval of minutes. 3.1, does anyone have any changes to the minutes the draft minutes as submitted for 12/18/2025? No. And seeing and hearing none. Let's see. Recording secretary. Oh, wait. I'm I'm I'm filling in tonight as as chair, so bear with me as I'm going through the script, everyone.

Thanks very much. There are no changes. The minutes for 12/18/2025 are approved as submitted. Recording secretary, do we have any public comment on item 3.1 approval of minutes?

If you are in chambers and wish to wish to make a comment, please make your way to the podium and please state your name for the record. You will have three minutes for your comment and a countdown timer will alert you at the conclusion of the period. We don't see any members of the public so we don't have any comments.

Yes. And just as a reminder, this is only public comment on the draft minutes from our meeting in December. So yeah, we'll have plenty of notice when we're talking about the item tonight. We're just going through our agenda items right now. So as there are no public comments on item 3.1, the approval of minutes, we will close public comment. Item four, public comment on non agenda items, non agenda matters. We are now taking public comments on item four, non agenda matters. Yes, sir. Hello.

Up here. My name is Duane DeWitt. I'm from Roseland.

Excuse me, Duane. I'm Yep. I'm not quite done yet. Okay. Yeah. Wait. Let me finish the the the blurb, and you know the drill on this Thank

kindly, sir.

Yep. Give me one give me one moment. This is the time when any person may address the board on matters not listed on this agenda, but which are within the subject matter jurisdiction of this board. Recording secretary, can you please provide instructions to the public?

If you are in chambers and wish to make a comment, please make your way to the podium and please state your name for the record. You will have three minutes for your comment and a countdown timer will alert you at the conclusion of that period.

And as a reminder, this is for non agenda items. This is not related to Creekside Village tonight. This is anything within the purview of the design review and preservation board. We do have one comment.

Hello. My name is Duane DeWitt. I'm from Roseland. I think it's been a good thing that the city saves money by combining design review board with preservation. I've always tried to get preservation in Roseland where I'm from.

It's been difficult because city plans typically are more about developing something than preserving what we already have. Over in Rosen, we have a number of Victorian houses that had been in the past designated to be historic. This was during what was called the Southwest Area Plan done thirty two years ago. Unfortunately, new members of Santa Rosa City staff don't necessarily take the time to research and find out what that plan had stipulated to us local residents there in Roseland, and the houses that we thought would be saved ended up being torn down. We've been trying to have a park along Roseland Creek.

We had hoped we'd be able to save the houses there, such as the clubhouses that are at Doyle Park, Franklin Park, and the house that was moved from Ripley Street up to Howarth Park in the past when they improved the freeway. So that was a pattern in the past to save the assets that we had. Unfortunately, the city decided to tear those houses down. They were structurally sound, inhabited houses when the city got ahold of them, and then they didn't deconstruct them for that nice redwood and that good material that was there. They just bashed them down and then left.

And for years now, we in the neighborhood have been having to deal with the fact that the area we call Roseland Neighborhood has been neglected. We'd actually like to see it be named Pomo Park And Preserve because the money that was put forward to save the acreage came from the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District to purchase the first 5.9 acres to the south of the creek for $2,500,000 then to purchase another 11 acres to the north of the creek for another $4,000,000 So $6,500,000 then the city put in another $1,700,000 So altogether, some serious money's been put together out there, but nothing's going forward. I'm a volunteer at the creek, and I pick up lots of debris from the homeless, lots of difficult situations with transient vagrants that don't care about our neighborhood or how it should be. What I hope is that you folks will take very seriously the term preservation in your mandate. You've got the name on there now, Design Review and Preservation.

Help us to preserve those neighborhoods that have been here even longer than Montgomery Village or Fountain Grove or Skyhawk. Rosalyn was here. Help us save it. Thank you.

Are you commenting? Or are you just walking in?

Hi there. I

am coming to make a public comment. I don't know. But are you doing open comment for non agenda items right now?

Non agenda items. Yes. I'm saying. I think you might have just walked in and walked to the podium. Awkward timing. At the wrong moment. Okay. Any other public comment on non agenda items? We'll close public comment on non agenda items. Moving on to item five, board business.

Item 5.1, statement of purpose. The design review and preservation board serves as the city's authority on design review and historic slash cultural preservation. The board is charged with considering the location, design, site plan configuration, and the overall effects of proposed projects on upon surrounding properties and to the city in general, as well as considering proposed alterations to properties within the city's preservation districts and designated landmarks. The board shall compare proposed projects to the general plan, any applicable specific plan, applicable zoning code standards and requirements, consistency of the project within the city's design guidelines, architectural criteria for special areas, the secretary of the interior standards for the treatment of historic properties, and other applicable city and state requirements. Item 5.2, board member reports.

Are there any board member reports?

I have one. Yes. So I have a report about the Waterways Advisory Committee. We met on February 26. And

first

discussed just general new member introductions including myself and held elections to calculate the year. We talked about meeting frequency and got into the department provided some reports on the South Santa Rosa plan, FEMA flood map development and upcoming water department outreach events. Sonoma Water also had a report provided. The item discussed specifically on the agenda for that meeting was the 1750 North Point Parkway project related to offensities within a waterway zone. And the committee discussed that project and ultimately provided feedback on it.

I think that covers it. Excellent. Thanks for that report, Drew, and thanks for attending the Waterways Advisory Committee for us. Recording Secretary, do we have any public comments on item 5.2 board member reports?

If you are in chambers and wish to make a comment, please make your way to the podium and please state your name for the record. You will have three minutes for your comment and a countdown timer will alert you at the conclusion of the time. Seeing no one walking to the podium.

I will close public comment on the board member reports. Item five point Vice Chair election has been continued to the next regular meeting of the Designer View and Preservation Board on May 7. I would like to announce that we have a new member of the Design Review Board, board member Nathan Bisbee. Thanks very much for attending. Nate, you wanna introduce yourself a minute?

Yeah, I'm Nate Bisbee. I'm an architect, a local architect, and I've lived in the area for a long time and I'm very honored to be here and to be part of the board. So thanks.

Excellent. Glad to have you on the board. Item six, department reports. I'd like to ask staff if there are any department reports.

Good afternoon board members. I just have two update for you. So one update is the December Design Review Board approved Lago Fresca project which was later appealed. The appeal was presented to the City Council on February 24 and Council denied the appeal and upheld the Design Review Board decision. Also just a heads up there is another appeal coming before you on May 7. The decision of the zoning administrator on a minor design review was appealed so the project will be before you on May 7. And that was the report. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Recording Secretary, do we have any public comment on item six, department reports?

If you are in chambers and wish to make a comment, please make your way to the podium and please state your name for the record. You will have three minutes for your comment and a countdown timer will alert you at the conclusion of that period. Seeing no one walking to the podium.

I will close public comment on department reports. Item seven, statements of abstention. Are there any abstentions on item 9.1 for tonight? Thank you. Item eight, consent items. There are no consent items tonight. We'll move on to the scheduled item. Item 9.1, the concept design review for the Creekside Village Townhomes. This is not a project at 232726112809 Montgomery Drive. Project number PLN25Dash0526.

See, should we do ex parte first or should we have the presentation?

First is the ex parte.

Okay. It says presented there. Okay. Great. Board members, will ask for any ex parte disclosures on this item.

I'll start down here, Drew. Won't put you on the hot seat

first name. I'm familiar with the site. Obviously, I grew up in Centralism, very familiar with the area, but I have nothing else to report.

I am familiar with the site and visited the site prior to this meeting and have familiarized myself with the history of different applications to develop the site.

I also am a lifelong Santa Rosa resident. I am very familiar with the site. I have not been there recently but have been in the past, have not spoken with anyone about it.

I'm familiar with the site. I grew up in Bennett Valley, went to high school and junior high school in Bennett Valley. Have worked on a small preliminary project on the property for PEP housing in the past twenty one years ago, and that's the extent.

And my ex parte disclosures, met with the city's planning team about this project, and I had a conversation with a colleague who is a retired anthropology professor from Sonoma State about their cultural context here. And I'm familiar with the site.

Let's see.

Are there any questions? Let's see here. Are we asking for questions or are we opening public comment?

Presentation.

Yeah, let's move to presentation. Okay. We're moving on a little further into this. I would like to invite staff to present item 9.1, the Creekside Village.

Great, thank you Acting Chair. Good afternoon members of the Board and members of the public. My name is Sheila Walzky, and I'm the project planner for this project. The item before you tonight is obviously Creekside Village townhomes. This is coming before you tonight for concept review. And the project is located at the addresses listed on this slide. It doesn't reach any further. We shift up. Yes. Can everyone hear me now?

Great. Okay. My presentation is fairly brief but I think it's important for members of the public to understand where we're at in this process and what's taking place tonight. This is a concept review meeting and that means the applicant has submitted an application that meets the city's posted submittal requirements to hold a concept review meeting. The board's purview is design and historic preservation.

Concept review does not include any actions or decisions on the project this evening. It's really to provide early feedback and receive comments on the conceptual plans. As we know, this project contains the Carrillo Adobe, a historic landmark and other resources. The applicants have not submitted a detailed plan for the Adobe other than depicting it on what appears to be a separate parcel labeled as a park. Following concept review applicants typically use the feedback received tonight to redesign or refine their projects and that's in anticipation of a formal development application.

That formal development application has not been submitted yet. And as such, there are no technical studies, there's no traffic, there's no environmental and staff has not provided any analysis of this project. Let's go to the next slide. I'm going to go through these slides fairly quickly because they mirror much of what is in the applicant's presentation. But just as a thumbnail sketch, this is what the project involves.

163 townhome style units. There's parking proposed on-site. These would be three story buildings and again the site of the Creo Adobe and a portion of Santa Rosa Creek. This is a neighborhood context map that gives you an aerial view of the project boundaries which are outlined in orange and you can see the neighborhoods surrounding. The next slide is just a little more zoomed in view.

Again, the project boundaries are outlined in orange. This is a GIS layer that shows you the zoning and general plan designations of the property. The general plan designation is medium residential and the zoning is PD which stands for plan development. Here are some site pictures from various perspectives. The first one upper left is at Hartley And Frankhat.

Next one in the top right corner is Montgomery And Frankhat. And the bottom photo is at Homin And Montgomery Drive. Here is the site plan for the project so you can get an idea of what the conceptual plans are showing. It's this series of I believe it's 25 buildings. The park is set aside.

Creek is in the rear. And unlike the neighborhood meeting, they're showing no buildings on the Frankette Montgomery side of the property. Some of the things that the design review and preservation board will be reviewing tonight include the images on the following slides, the floor plan, the architecture, landscaping and amenities, colors, material, lighting and fencing. And then as for tonight's action, the design review and preservation board will provide comments and direction for concept review. This portion is exempt from CEQA because there is no possibility that the action will have any effect on the environment.

And this just represents what we're doing tonight which is requesting feedback, no actions or decisions. This concludes my presentation. This slide also includes my contact information. If anyone needs to reach me, feel free to email me or give me a phone call. And then the applicants are here this evening and they're prepared to provide their presentation. Thank you.

Thank you, Planner Wolski. I'd like to move on to questions for staff from the board. And I guess I will start once again down here with Drew. Questions for staff?

I think just to reiterate, you're confirming that the CEQA pathway is not known at this time, right? So just to clarify again, our purview tonight is the design review. Could you just repeat specifically what you're looking for us tonight?

Yes, you are correct. Tonight you'll be looking to respond to what the applicants have provided in their submittal packet, which are all those plans that contain the floor plans, roof plans, architecture, on-site circulation, fencing, things of that nature.

And just to reiterate with that, we don't have any of the cultural studies, traffic studies, evidence to support these designs as of yet. This is concept for the design.

This is correct and I think many people know there was an approved project here. There are some documents from that time. They're not a part of this new project. We are waiting to see if the applicants choose to do a formal development submittal and then we can react to those plans in that application.

Okay. Great. Yeah. Thank you. And just wanted to to emphasize that fact because seeing not a project can be confusing for people. So thank you. Moving down the line, Ingrid, any additional questions for Steph? I

do have some questions. Does this qualify as a small lot subdivision in terms of what parts of the zoning code it would have to conform to or be regulated by?

At this point no we haven't even looked at that and it would be for potentially multifamily and a condominium style situation. But a concept review, we just don't have enough information to be able to tell what they're doing. We haven't anticipated on the project website, we have an anticipated perhaps path of entitlement based on what we're seeing. But until we get the formal application, we don't know what it will constitute and what review is required.

I read or seem to recall that there was a percentage of units set aside as affordable. Is that correct?

At this point with concept I believe the applicants are proposing for 16 out of the 163 units to be affordable. We will wait and react to that once we receive the formal application.

Is this proposed as a for sale development?

That we don't know.

The project is so tied to a cultural resource and a natural one, the creek and the adobe. I guess the answer to this question you've already provided, that the applicant has not provided any information about how they plan to preserve the adobe or the natural environment along the creek. Is that correct? That's correct. And so the city, in effect, can't respond or request that certain development be tied to the preservation of the current natural environment and cultural resources there. Is that correct?

Yeah, those can certainly be comments. This is an opportunity to also receive feedback to the applicants. So if you're interested in something in particular, it's a great opportunity to do that. You can react to what you're seeing which may be the architecture, the design, or other thoughts that you have about the site so that when they if and when they come back for a formal application, it can include the things this Board is looking for.

Well, do think that the site happens to be, due to its location near schools, major retail, a major high quality grocery store, multimodal transit. It's a great site for housing. And I think that the creek and the adobe, because of the significance of their history, their value to the city, actually enhances the value of this parcel for the developer. And so I'd like to see the architecture in turn acknowledge that value and be tied more closely to the history of the Adobe and that type of architecture. Instead, what we're seeing is a sort of hybrid craftsman modern.

The fenestration, the window styles are very modern.

Ingrid, I think we're getting a little fine grain for right now into our comments. These are all great. We're going to circle back to board member comments and we'll have Okay. Yeah, we'll do this after the public comment as But any questions, specific questions for staff?

I guess the rest of my comments oh, here's one. Does the development probably a little too involved, but is it possible that the development might qualify for an exemption from CEQA because of AB 130?

That we don't know. We're going to need to wait until we receive that formal development application. With every application we receive, we request that the development team provide us with their proposed CEQA pathway. At concept review, it's too premature to talk about the CEQA pathway that the applicants may wish to pursue.

Okay, understood. Thank you.

Thank you. Sure.

This may also be too early in the process. It seems most a lot of things are. Assuming the applicant moves forward, will the city be requiring an archaeological study? There's more than just the Carrillo Adobe and the creek. There's also the Pomo tribal component to this.

There we go. Yes and we already have documentation of those reports from the past. A lot of the documentation is old. We're going to have to, if a formal application comes in, see what documents will need to be revised or refreshed from that period. So yes, those will all be a part of a formal development application submittal.

Thank you.

Questions for staff?

No further questions.

We have an additional question Drew. Yes.

Real quick. No need to go into all the details, but just could you help us understand, we've talked about a previous project with previous approvals, previous documentation. Is this a completely new considered a completely new project or is this some kind of carry on from a previous project?

Yeah, there was a previously approved project back in the early 2000s. Entitlements for that likely design review, probably tentative map for a subdivision those have all expired. The applicants did record a final map for the project site. What will become of that? We don't know until there's a new application in with new material to review. But right now there are the project site does not have entitlements that they would need for instance for design review or subdivision.

Thanks. And I have no questions for staff. At this time, I'd like to invite the applicant to present the project for us. And once again, just a reminder, can move the podium up and down, up there, and definitely eat eat the mic as much as possible.

Now you might be able to be heard. I I'm gonna need a few

more inches so you can hear too.

Good evening. My name is Mark Polarczyk. I'm with Swenson. I also have David Meats here from the architecture department of Swenson. I also have Jim Fain and Brianna with Carly and Macy, who's local landscape and civil, who's working on the project with us.

I do want to say that, yes, the old entitlement and all of the effort and work from all of the previous CEQA analysis, etc, and that 2007 entitlement has now been expired, and that is why we are back with a proposal. We also heard and understood that we wanted to do the community meeting and also the conceptual design review as part of that process and working with the neighborhood and hearing the public as we work with staff in submitting a formal application. So, hear and work together in a way to implement as much as possible into the project. So you it looks like it's cutting off on the screen. Okay.

So we're looking at 163 units. We are looking at providing on-site affordable housing. We are looking at this as a for sale product, and so this would be, that's in essence where the tentative map and final map would be, so this would be a for sale product. We are providing a lot of these units, if you look at them, are townhome style living. So you have two car garage at your unit.

The additional parking is surface parking around the park as well as the street. We do have on the overall site, the overall site is roughly 15 acres. We heard loud and clear from the community meeting about the concern about the park size and the building at the residential intersection. You will see that that has changed in just going from the community meeting to this conceptual design meeting. If you want to skip to the next page.

So one of the economic benefits to the city in addition to the fact that we are providing housing and BMR below market rate units is the anticipated $11,000,000 estimated in connection fees and permanent impact fees to the city in addition to Census' for sale product to be generating an additional revenue source of approximately $1,700,000 annually from the property taxes for the residential component. On the site plan that you see tonight, obviously we did address the concerns about the building that we had up along the edge and at the residential entry. That is gone. The park is exactly the same way that it was in our previous entitlement approval. So, has grown to the full size, and we are anticipating the Adobe preservation as outlined in the previous entitlement and the full architectural review that the architect did on that portion of the Adobe.

And the park, in essence, is the same outline as previously that we would be looking to complete and then deed to the city upon completion in a similar fashion to the previous approvals entitlements. You want to skip over? Next slide. This is another site plan. You can go to the next one.

And pretty consistent. We can go to the next one. So here you can see the the full park reimplemented to the corner, the the outline of the Adobe and the footing and the preservation of that and how that would be incorporated. We also are showing the continued path, the pedestrian path along the rear between the creek and the and the development. This was an item that was discussed at a staff level and that would be something that also needs to be produced from staff response on a full application about the desire for that path.

Let's go to the next slide. Now it gets fun. So this was what we showed the community last time, right? And I want to preface that, and this is where we were when we had the conversation. We heard that the buildings along the front edge and to your right was definitely a concern with the overall size of the park and the and the impact that it had.

The rear portion of it along the creek, I mean, our density is is subtle. It's within the lines of a medium density product and we are treating the streets for for that pedestrian connectivity as well as bicycle connectivity to the to the retail that's just east of us. If you want to flip the slide here. And now this is the change to the site plan. Can you flip back?

That was before. And there we are again. So the park is back in the exact same way that it was approved. The Adobe is honored and respected in a similar fashion to exactly where we were before. And we wanted to keep that level of respect for the overall site plan.

You can go to the next slide. So, now we start getting into more architecture and I can hand it over to David here. As I mentioned, this is where a lot of the parking, have your own two car garage side by side, and that's going to be critical to the livability and the way for these to sell. So if you wanna move to the next, these are just the the floor plans. Right? You've got your Ground Floor if you want.

Hi. How are doing? David Meeds from Swenson, Swenson Architecture. And like Mark had mentioned, these are the four plans. This is showing a four unit dwelling unit building here. This is the second level, so this would be the living level. Oh, I'm sorry. Actually, this is the 3rd Floor. So this would be the bedroom level. We're going back and forth here. Sorry. Guys are Living. You're exercising me. Yeah. So this is the living level right here.

And then as we look later on to the elevations, we did provide a lot of windows from this space. We went with larger windows and the intent was to take advantage of the creek, the surrounding hills and then the Adobe Park neighboring this development here. Actually, you wanna go on to the next slide. So this would be this is showing the third level, is the bedroom level. So we've got master bedroom and then we've got two smaller bedrooms to the rear.

These are all three bedroom, three and a half bath units. So there's a small bonus room on the first entry level with a half bath. And, it's more or less a typical unit throughout. And then we've got a combination of four, five, six, and all the way up to eight unit depending on where it is in the project. That's the assembly of the dwelling units.

Yeah, go next slide. So there you start to see the eight plex.

Yeah, so this would be the eight plex and then this is just to help us achieve that density that the city's looking for. We did stagger the townhouses to create a little bit additional articulation. Each one has its own defined entry, which you'll see in the elevations later. If you want to go on to the next slide. So once again, this would be the living level.

This is more just repetition but you kind of see how they work in a larger building format. And then if you wanna go on actually, one thing I wanted to mention, you can go back to that last slide, they also do have large decks or balconies on each unit. And so there's that ability to have that indoor outdoor connectivity, which is nice. So you can take advantage of the nice you have a lot of really nice days up here in Santa Rosa. And so be able to take advantage of that nice weather and the views from the outside in your own private balcony space. Okay. Next. There you go. And then once again, reiterating this is the bedroom level, this is the same just on a larger eight plex building format.

That's four bedrooms too. So we have three bedrooms, I think

we have three bedrooms. Okay. So here we go. This is our typical elevation right here. So what you're looking at is we've got the intent was to be more of a contemporary architecture.

They do retain as it was earlier noticed that they do retain a little bit of craftsman esque detailing, and that's something that we're still working through internally at the office. And so I think part of the reason for this meeting today was also just to pick up additional feedback is to see what features were the community gravitated towards and other features that they may have not have accepted as much. You see that we've got private entries here on each one with the large it's outlined with the brick feature. So it's trying to provide a higher level material at that entry level experience and also create more of a pedestrian level scale. And then as you go up the building, you'll notice on the second and third Level, just once again, larger windows, and that's just to take in that feel of the indoor outdoor connectivity.

Next slide. So these are the end units. We also made sure that we brought that articulation around to the side. So we've got portions where the 3rd Floor steps out creating an additional shadow line so that we don't have large flat facades. We wanted to make sure that we emphasize as much shadow line as possible.

Continue on with the next slide. And then here's to the rear. So this is along the garage entry side where you can see the balconies on the 2nd Level, the living level. One other thing is we we took our our color scheme. We pulled it from natural colors in the environment, and that was our just trying to keep with the modern theme, and so that was our take on on that.

If you want to move to the next slide. So this is a five plex. You just kind of see what it looks like in a larger scale and then just how we would break up. So the idea is that we're not keeping a monochromatic building. We wanted to have each unit have its own character and to be able to identify whose unit was, you know, so you had each one had their own personality in a sense. Next slide, please. Thanks. And so this is just showing once again different color scheme on the end caps of those units. There you go. And then to the rear, there you go.

And then also once again, this has got a little bit more of the earth tones on this building, but it shows that we really tried to play with the articulation. We wanted to make sure that we didn't have a flat facade and that all these townhomes did have their own personality. And I think that kind of helps just to the walkability, the neighborhood environment that you're out walking through this community. It there's a lot for your eye to to move around on and it it keeps a lot more of an interesting feel to that space. Okay, and are we going through all of them? This might get some repetition.

Yeah, you don't have to go through elevation fronts but this also calls out a little bit of the material board. If you're doing the stucco, the hardy plank, the brick veneer, and so there's a lot of different elevations or movement within materials in addition to the elevation plans. But you can keep going and you can see the side edge and then go through the eight plex.

Yeah, so we're moving all the way, there you go. We're moving all the way through these but you see that there's just a lot of different variation throughout. And then here we go, this right here just shows the color palette that we have. I'm sorry that the samples don't show as well in this format, but we've got a brick down in the lower corner there and then we'll do a better job on this material board on the next go around, but it largely we're just showing the colors and then the materials that we have. Stucco, that's something that we probably wouldn't show on this, but light fixtures as well. I think is that

it? Next slide.

Renderings. Okay. Here we go. And then now you're getting you get a feel for what those different elevations in those townhomes look like actually with the context of the smaller parklets in the surrounding neighborhood around it. One thing we're trying to be mindful was is when we were placing these townhomes is that we had smaller parklets in the community itself, and so that there was a gathering area for the residents and then for the neighbor for the kids to be able to play in these neighborhoods. Next slide, please. Why don't you speak?

Yeah. This this one definitely goes to show kind of the offset. Right? The the Adobe, the preservation, the path along the rear, and the changes that we made on that whole edge to really implement what we heard from the community. Next slide.

We appreciate you guys' time and definitely here to listen to the feedback to see what we can learn from the community and the board and see what's best implemented for the full application.

Thank you very much for the presentation. I would like to move on to Thank you. Item 9.1, public comment on or excuse me. I would like to move on to public comment on item 9.1. Before I do open the public comment, I was handed a letter that the recording secretary received right before the meeting.

This is from the Federated Indians of Great and Rancheria. It's titled the impact on tribal cultural resources from Creeks Side Village Townhomes Project as Currently Designed, and this will be entered into the record after the meeting. Just want to announce that.

I am here to give public comment on behalf of the Federated Indians of Great Neranturia.

Oh, yes. I do need to formally open the the meeting. And I I assume you're Laurel. Yes. Number one. Yes. So I'm opening the public comment on item 9.1 and our first commenter is Laurel, please.

Thank you. I wasn't trying to overly prompt you. I just wanted to let you know I was here.

No problem. And Laurel, we'll we'll get the clock started for you. And just as a reminder to get as close to the microphone as possible. Thank you.

Oh, thank you.

Yep. Got a hand with the podium.

We'll get everything together. Okay. Good evening. Thank you. A design review and preservation board. I am Laurel Ross. I am the tribal vice chair of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. I am joined with fellow council member Terry Barbosa. First, I would like to read to you a letter, from our tribal chairman on behalf of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. I write to express the tribe's concern with the latest proposed design of the Creekside Village townhomes project.

Figure is comprised of Coast Miwok and Southern Pomo people, a federally recognized tribe culturally affiliated with the lands being considered for development. This is our homeland. The tribe acknowledges the need to provide housing in Sonoma County, but is greatly concerned with the housing being built on land that would continue to threaten and destroy important sacred sites on these 14 acres. Figure has been involved with and in consultation with the City Of Santa Rosa for over two decades. While we are encouraged by recent changes to the project to avoid certain culturally important areas, the tribe remains concerned that the latest designs will still have a devastating impact on tribal cultural resources and our ancestors.

Figure looks forward to continue consultation with the city of Santa Rosa and engagement with the project applicant to avoid impacts to the significant cultural place. Further, for the remainder of my time, I want to acknowledge that there are many tribal citizens present today as well as cultural staff, including our tribal preservation historical office who continue to engage on the consultation. I want to say this though, we're not speaking about the impacts abstractly. This area is where our tribal ancestors and cultural resources are. They're there.

We're talking about our relatives who are still there, and we are still here. This is a place our people are still connected to, and that connection carries responsibility, and now that's a shared responsibility with you. Our ancestral ties to this land are deep. It is in fact since time in memorial, the very foundation and history of the city exists within our ancestral homelands right there on this site. Our tribe has continued to work in good faith and communication and government to government.

I say this with respect but also with urgency. There is still time to avoid harm, and that matters because once these impacts happen, they cannot be undone. Thank you. Good evening.

Thank you very much for the comment and for the text of the letter. Next commenter is Alima Silverman.

Hello, thank you board members and city staff for this opportunity to speak with you, project, I'm commenting here as a twenty two year resident of Santa Rosa. I live on Midway Drive. I'm an architect, recently retired in the 2025. And I'm also speaking as a concerned citizen for preserving the heritage of this site. I've been involved in numerous development projects in Santa Rosa and Sonoma County during these twenty two years, but I'll be brief with my comments tonight.

I would like to see the entire site preserved as part of the heritage of Santa Rosa, including the Pomo Village and the Carrillo Adobe. I don't know why this was ever sold for housing development or zoned planned development because as a historical site, we just don't build on those sites. I mean, I never have in forty years as an architect and designer, you just don't build on historic sites. I agree with, the comments in the proposal by, Michael, Morado in his letter, to staff dated April 10. This property at issue is a Santa Rosa historic landmark and also it's listed in the California Register of Historic Resources, qualifies as a California Tribal Council resource and Native American sacred site.

And it has been determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. This is what I'm saying about it being a historic site. Tribal approval would also be required for building on this site. That wasn't true back when certain things were maybe submitted, but it's true now. My specific concerns about this proposed project include repetitive design, lack of variety of building types, it's very monotonous, access locations contributing to increased traffic and congestion in the area and a lack of respect for the preservation of the history of this site.

I don't think what's been done to preserve the Adobe is sufficient. I support affordable housing in Santa Rosa, but not on this site. Thank you.

Thank you. Adrian Covert, please. And I just received a good suggestion. I'm going to announce the next two commenters. Chris will be next, followed by Mike Murato. Adrian first.

Great. Thank you so much for opening this forum for public comment on this project. My name is Adrian Covert. I'm a West End resident and a father of a child in Santa Rosa City Schools. When I was a kid, I had about 10 family members who lived within a ten minute radius of me, and today, all of my family who still survive, I'm the last one in California.

Sister's in Virginia, cousins are in New Mexico, parents are in Oregon, and all of that is due to one reason, it's the cost of housing. Because we didn't build enough housing twenty years ago, my family now can't afford to live here today, and my son as a result is going to know far fewer of his family members and have a much less rich social environment than I had growing up because of housing. Now, how that translates to Santa Rosa. Santa Rosa is facing a budget crisis that threatens basic city services. We're facing a demographic crisis that's threatening the viability of our public schools, and we're facing affordability crisis that's pushing out families.

So here we have before us 163 family size units that are near core amenities, and part of the project and part of the proposal is to reinvest to preserve the historic Korea Adobe, which hasn't had any investment in decades and likely doesn't have decades left to stand without quick intervention. This project, we heard from the developer, is going to raise $11,000,000 in impact fees at a time when core city services are threatened and $1,700,000 annually to the city's budget in property tax assessments for parks, for schools, and for public safety. So, I agree and I support this project. I think it's essential for the city's future that we grow and then we add housing for the future generation and to help support the demographic decline in our public schools. And as far as the design goes, I'm pleased and I would encourage the addition of connectivity with the park pathway, the multi use pathway that's being proposed behind the project near the creek.

Curb ball bouts are a practical way of increasing pedestrian safety for crossing the streets as well as parking protected bike lanes along the main avenue. Crucial, all those things are easy to do and should be part of the proposal as well as the preservation of the Adobe. Thank you very much.

Thanks very much. Chris Guenther followed by Mike Morato.

Evening board members. My name is Chris Guenther. I'm a homeowner in Montgomery Village and a parent in the area, and I'm here to express my support for the project or the soon to be project once it's proposed. I've been walking, riding, and driving by this site for fifteen years, noting what a shame it is that such an important piece of Santa Rosa history is hidden away behind a chain link fence, decaying in or decaying into the ground. I'm thrilled that this project would help provide the impetus and funding to create and sustain a park and historical site so that everybody could understand that heritage that sits there.

I also welcome the additional missing middle housing, which is sorely needed and seems thoughtfully designed. As a father of two tenor teenagers, I really hope my own children will be able to one day afford to live here, and these are the types of homes that young families and professionals want and need us to build. In short, this project seems like a win win. We get to save Santa Rosa's heritage and create much needed desirable housing. I hope you'll approve this project or at least, express, support through the feedback you give tonight, and I look forward to welcoming my new neighbors when these units are built and sold. Thank you.

Thank you, Mike Murado, followed by Kathy Boone and then Larry Carrillo.

My name is Mike Murado. I'm a third generation Santa Rosen who strongly advocates new housing for our community. However, the Creekside Village project location is totally wrong. I urge the city and developer to find an alternative site where construction would not obliterate Santa Rosa's birthplace and heritage. The land includes a Pomo Village site dating to 400 BC.

It's got cemeteries, Native American cemeteries, unmarked graves. It's it's the very place where in 1824, father Amoros from the Mission San Rafael bestowed the name Santa Rosa on our community. That's where it all started. It's the place where the first Californio family settled in the entire region, where the first trading post, stage stop, general store, and US post office were established. And beyond the Carrillo Adobe itself, there are buildings or remnants thereof from the eighteen twenties that were part of a mission outpost of San Rafael.

And as pointed out by previous speakers, this is not only a Santa Rosa historic landmark. It's also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources. It qualifies as a tribal cultural resource. It's a Native American sacred site and cemetery, and it has been determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. It is exceedingly important to local Pomo and Cosmiguac, to descendants of Californio settlers, to the larger Mexican American community in our area, and to other longtime citizens of Santa Rosa, to educators at all levels, to historians, archaeologists, members of civic organizations, and countless others.

Some people have stated that laws now require the city to approve the housing project on Montgomery Drive. This, of course, is pure nonsense. Laws do require housing but do not indicate the specific parcel on which the housing needs to be built. Finally, any notion that impact mitigation would be quick and cheap is simply naive. Even if tribal approval could be granted, which I doubt, that the cemetery relocation and archaeological data recovery would eat up months and millions of dollars.

Thank you.

Thanks very much. Thanks very much. And I I I do appreciate the applause and the support that we we are giving our speakers, but it will extend the evening if we applaud after every commenter. But I do appreciate that. Kathy Boone followed by Larry Carrillo with Alex DeGiorgea, excuse me, following that. Kathy.

The people of Santa Rosa have a unique opportunity to reverse decades of negligence of our city's most valuable heritage. The 14.9 acres that include the Carrillo Adobe, an ancient Indian village site, and human remains, a mission outpost, our city's first general store and US post office, is now threatened with destruction by the Creekside Village housing development. This is not about yimbi versus nimbi or old geezers versus young homeowners. Rather, it's a matter of respecting our city's roots and sense of place for our children, for new residents, for folks who grew up here, for all Californians. We're fortunate to still have the actual place where so much history happened, but once it's gone, it's lost forever.

Think about the decades of missed opportunities to teach our children about our own history, whether standing on the site where it happened, learning while doing, maybe making their own adobe bricks or spinning wool, or learning about the transition from Indian Rancheria to California Ranchos to California statehood. Fellow Santa Rosans, let's get this done. Let's build the housing, but build it at an appropriate site rather than on top of a cemetery and the place that holds the origins of Santa Rosa. We can find a better location, convince the city that they should do the right thing.

Larry Carrillo, followed by Alex, DeGeorget.

Larry Carrillo, friends of the Carrillo Adobe, I have six points to cover, and so I'll work through those six. Swenson has not paid property taxes on Parcel 6, which is the creek setback and the Carrillo Adobe in the last nineteen years. There needs to be an investigation. No tax on 6.27 acres. Number two, Building 25 violates the 30 foot setback from the Northwest Wing reference 2005 EIR addendum.

Number three, southwest foundations are covered by driveway and buildings. No building on foundations. Number four, the Northwest Wing would be most likely to be reconstructed because of its historical connection to the Sanderfell Mission. We need full view from Montgomery Drive of that section of the property. Number five, the friends would like three acres top of the bank park with full views to Montgomery Drive.

Number six, and the most important part, the commission is voting to save Santa Rosa's history. Be able to tell your children and your grandchildren that you helped save it, not cover it with three story buildings. Thank you.

Thanks very much. Alex.

Hello, my name is Alex DiGiorgi. I'm a Santa Rosa resident, an advocate affordable housing, and a professional archaeologist, and I have thirty years of experience in Northern California. I have serious concerns about the proposed Creekside Village townhomes development and its potential impacts to historical resources. In my opinion, this project would result in significant and irreversible harm to one of the most important cultural sites in Santa Rosa. Allowing this development to proceed would be a mistake.

The Crio Adobe is a designated Santa Rosa Historic Landmark. It's listed on the California Registry of Historic Resources and eligible for the National Register. By every standard, it is a highly significant place. For approximately two thousand four hundred years, nearly a 120 generations, a thriving Native American community lived here. Ancestral graves remain making this not only an archaeological site but a sacred place for the southern Pomo and other tribes.

The historic period is equally important. In the eighteen twenties, early adobe structures were built here and Maria Maria Carrillo established her residence on this property. From this location came the first general store and post office laying the foundation for the city itself. This property represents a rare and continuous cultural landscape connecting indigenous heritage, Mexican California, and early American settlement. Few places hold this level of depth and continuity.

Once destroyed, resources like this cannot be replaced. California streamlined affordable housing approvals, Senate Bill 35 and Senate Bill two forty three, by reducing timelines and allowing qualifying projects to bypass discretionary effectively avoiding CEQA through amendments to government code sixty five thousand nine thirteen point four. Similarly AB130 provided a CEQA exemption for urban housing developments in areas outlined in public resources code 21,080.66. However, projects are ineligible for this ministerial process if a tribe or cultural resources is present on the site that is listed on state or local registries. CEQA applies to this project.

If it proceeds, mitigation will require to address the adverse effects to the cultural resource. Mitigation would be not simple. It would require extensive excavation, analysis, and tribal consultation likely costing millions of dollars and would involve the disturbance of Native American human remains. As the lead agency under CEQA, the city is responsible for ensuring mitigation is adequate and effective. This responsibility cannot be delegated.

The city retains ultimate responsibility and liability for its deficiencies. While we need affordable housing is real, this is not the right place for it. This project would cause substantial and unequitable harm to a unique cultural landscape and a place of deep importance to local tribes. The city now faces a clear choice, allow the destruction of this origin place or preserve it for future generations. I strongly urge you to preserve the full 14.9 acre parcel. Thank you.

Thank you, Alex. And Brian I did not give you notice. Apologies for that. Meg McNeese will be coming up after him, followed by Peter Nelson, but Brian Much.

Good

evening, Design Review and Preservation Board, other fellow friends, colleagues, any other folks watching online. As stated, my name is Brian Much. I'm a proud resident of Santa Rosa, a professional archaeologist amongst other subfields within our glorious field of cultural heritage resources management. Alex forgot one thing. In 2016, Alex and I were the ones that worked together to see the, as we termed it, Maria Curio Adobe Archaeological Site, also known as California Sonomafour, was nominated to the National Register and later determined eligible.

A lot of the perhaps discussion is maybe missing the point that there's lines quote that have meaning and boundaries around that determination of eligibility for that significant site. A lot of us don't really care much about that line and feel the entire parcel should be preserved for something glorious and even better than a National Register listed resource. I urge the preservation board to look within your regs and what you have within you. Answer the question within yourselves. How many California register listed resources do you know we have in the city?

This is one that you should tread lightly on. One of the things that I'm trying to do is try to think outside the box and challenge the city to partner with the developer and other stakeholders to see what else we can do to have a multiple win situation, not just a win win. I want to see a win win win win. Maybe other wins for that matter because we're talking multiple generations back. The concept has come around. When I moved here twenty years ago now with my teenage children, I never thought I'd be able to stand in one spot and talk about everything. You wanna talk about indigenous cultures? Let's have that conversation. You wanna talk about geopolitics in the eighteen hundreds? Sure.

Let's go, kid. Let's go a little bit earlier. Let's take the slider. Let's bring it into the Mexican period. Do you wanna go back to the Russians coming in? Maybe we should bring in my anyway. Long story short, you get the idea. This is a really unique location and I encourage our local city leaders and other stakeholders to rally around a different strategy here, find ways to preserve this resource. Other local governments in Sonoma County and throughout the state have worked with developers, forged partnerships, brought in additional stakeholders. We can raise money and to find other ways to create a unique opportunity for the public to benefit.

We want the connectiveness. We want homes. We want to see people hop on their bike and leave this heritage park and go to another part of the city to spend their money and go to bed at night. I also hope the ideas and some suggestions might find their way into consideration. I respectfully thank you for your time as we work through this and I hope that we can find a collaborative solution to this problem in front of us.

Meg McNeese. Oh my god.

I'm sorry. I can't see anybody.

Oh, the podium can go up and down yet.

There you are. Okay.

Thank you, Meg.

Thank you for your time and genuine interest. My name is Meg McNeese. I would like to ask you, the preservation board, to consider this project in two ways, the developer's twenty years stewardship and the land's historical significance. I've lived in my home on Midway Drive for forty years. The first twenty, the Catholic church took care of that property.

They cared for the orchard and they mowed. The last twenty years under this company, it has been neglected. My hope is that the proposal will be withdrawn, moved to a more suitable site, and that the developer will sell the land at a just price to a foundation for its presentation preservation. Surely, out of Santa Rosa's 25,000 foot footprint, this natural habitat of just 15 acres can remain a wildlife sanctuary and, more importantly, a historical park. I realize the board and the city must balance competing priorities.

If the city is to grow, it must have housing for families who work here. But weighing those priorities, the city must consider not only what is gained but what is lost. At a time when the Trump administration is actively erasing and rewriting the uncomfortable parts of our country's history, this city has to has the opportunity to safeguard ours. Indigenous people nurtured this land through sacred rituals for thousands of years and left behind priceless cultural artifacts. Their human remains also reside there.

Starting in 1977, an archaeological studies on the site have verified these facts. In the future, Native American and Hispanic residents will learn the proud role their ancestors played in the city's settlement, but also the heartbreaks they endured. Once places are paved over, they are lost forever. Places have echoes which can inspire us and teach us lessons not available anywhere else. Thank you.

Peter Nelson followed by Kent Lightfoot and Rachel Miner. Peter Nelson.

Hello. My name is Peter Nelson. I'm a citizen of the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria. I also need to say that I am not, formally or officially, representing my tribe in my comments. I'm here as, a member of the public as well as a resident of Santa Rosa.

I live in the Burbank neighborhood in a historic home, from 1912. I understand, this process very well. I'm a professional archaeologist and RPA. I have a PhD in archaeology, and I'm a professor at, the University of California at Berkeley in, environmental science policy and management as well as ethnic studies. Just zooming on, my great great uncle worked for Luther Burbank as a wage laborer at a time when him and his brothers couldn't afford the nickel to go across the Golden Gate Bridge when it was first built and it was open to foot traffic.

My grandpa grew up essentially homeless and, you know, lived in a tent for the first years of his childhood, and I feel very privileged to have a historic home and move through these processes. We shouldn't be exempt from this, and I as a homeowner am not exempt from the process of review and archaeological survey and historic structure assessment. This project should not be exempt either. It should go through a very rigorous review and, ultimately, should not be developed on this site. As many other people said, it's not the appropriate site.

I support housing for people as well. We all need housing, but just not here. I also know for a fact that, you know, in considering the information that is known, we know a lot about the significance of this area. I've been out with tribal elders to this very site talking about the cultural and environmental significance, not just cultural but environmental. Many different things that would be lost if this entire property is developed, and even if there's a green space, that's going to cause significant harm and cumulative impacts to tribal people and to everyone in the Santa Rosa community.

This is a place that has, significance to everyone here, and it's something that should not be developed on. Again, just reiterating, this should not be an exempt project. It should go through full review, tribal consultation, and tribal expertise guiding any sort of mitigation that comes from this in this process, but certainly I am in support of the the project not moving forward and not being developed here. Thank you.

Thank you, Peter. Kent Lightfoot followed by Rachel Miner and then Duane Dewitt. Kent.

Yeah. My name is Kent Lightfoot. I'm an archaeologist and a member of the UC Berkeley faculty for forty years. I grew up in Santa Rosa. I'm a proud alumnus of Santa Rosa High.

I have serious concerns about the development of this property. As you're hearing this afternoon, the cultural heritage of this place is truly amazing. Consequently, the city of Santa Rosa and the developer need to have their eyes wide open in attempting to develop this important historical place. I believe the extant Carrillo Adobe is only the tip of the iceberg of what will be found. I expect that the proposed development will encounter a momentous archaeological landscape of considerable size and complexity.

I base this on my experience in studying other early colonial settlements similar to the eighteen twenty's Mission Out Station and the later Maria Carrillo Mexican Rancho. These places are complex, multifaceted, and often yield diverse lines of archaeological evidence. In addition to the main Carrillo adobe structure, there were probably other outbuildings including storage sheds, ramadas, tack rooms, barns, corrals, outdoor kitchens, quarters for non indigenous and indigenous workers, extensive trash mittens with ceramics, glass, metal, funnel remains, and personal items, and most likely an associated village area that provided residents for native people who built and labored on the Rancho. What adds significantly to the complexity of the archaeological landscape and really the sacred nature of this place is that the Mexican period outstation and rancho were placed near or on a pre colonial ancestral Pomo village dating back more than two thousand years. And this may include also the remains of various residential house structures, hearths, underground ovens, a rich assortment of floral, artifactual materials, and multiple human ancestral remains and associated funeral objects.

The idea that you can place 163 townhouses in this area and not discover and impact significant pre colonial and later historical remains is unrealistic.

And I

emphasize development near sensitive archaeological remains often leads to costly delays, unexpected mitigation requirements, and expensive litigation. For these reasons, I strongly urge the city to reconsider this proposed townhouse project and to explore other alternatives such as turning this into a historic park for all the people of Santa Rosa in California. Thank you very much.

Rachel Miner, followed by Duane Dewitt, followed by Shana Gauss. Rachel.

Hello. My name is Rachel Miner. I am the curator and supervisor at the Santa Rosa Junior College Multicultural Museum. Some of the most important work that I do at my job is repatriation work. In January, I was able to facilitate the return of many Pomo cultural objects from the Correo Adobe site to the Federated Indians of Graton Rancheria, whose traditional territory includes what we currently call Santa Rosa.

A local woman who was a teenager at the time had collected these items in the 1960s on the grounds of the Carrillo Adobe and donated them to the museum. Four days ago, the esteemed UC Berkeley anthropologist Kent Lightfoot, who I just we just heard from, wrote a letter to the project planner for the Creekside Village townhomes project urging the developer to understand the significance of the Carrillo Adobe site. This site includes not only the Adobe itself and its connection to Santa Rosa's history, but also evidence that includes a Pomo village site, very likely including grave sites, that predates the colonial settlement by thousands of years. Excavation, if it goes forward, will harm Native American communities whose histories have been trampled repeatedly in the name of progress. As a concerned citizen, I urge the developers to reconsider this and for the city of Santa Rosa to preserve this important site.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Duane Dewitt followed by

Can I

use the overhead projector, please?

Yes. Do you need a hand with that, Dwayne? We're all set. All set. Dwayne.

Alright. My name is Duane Dewitt. I'm from Santa Rosa. I was at Santa Rosa High School when Kent Lightfoot was there, so I got some credence. With that in mind, I wanted to say we could do a win win here as was mentioned earlier. There could be a land swap. The tribe has some dough these days. As a matter of fact, some of my friends say they got more money than God. They're doing really well. So maybe we could work something up where we get the 165 housing units done in a manner which doesn't reflect any negative activity upon what are known as sacred sites and do some positive things for the creek.

I'm really impressed to see so many people here today that want to help the Carrillo Adobe. Thirty years ago when the downtown task force was talking about things along there, nobody stepped up, And I haven't seen anybody step up until now. So now that you're all here, remember my name, Duane DeWitt. I'd be more than glad to help you because I've been trying to save Pomoland along Roseland Creek for all those thirty years. It's really difficult, basically, because the nature of our current system here in Santa Rosa is development driven.

That's why I put up no sprawl. Alright? We have a group called the Sonoma County Housing Advocacy Group that started thirty two years ago. We've been trying to get housing closer into the center of town. Right now, the city limits stretch all the way from Bellevue Avenue in the South to Wood Avenue in the North, a footprint almost as big as San Francisco, and nobody's been speaking up about that very much.

So if you want to sign on to the idea of no sprawl, city centered growth, transportation oriented development, and every other buzzword you can use with the architects and the planners and the other folks, let's get together as regular people and save the Pomo sacred sites that we talk of. I'll come help you save that site over Montgomery Village. You guys come on over to Roseland and help us. Saturday morning at 10:00, we'll be along Roseland Creek where we're doing our early Earth Day with people who've been helping that creek for over thirty years, and we know Pomo sites were there. We know there was a graveyard out there also.

This kind of stuff takes time. I'm a patient fellow. I'll keep coming back. And you're gonna have to be patient also because the way this is gonna work is they're gonna need to get an EIR probably. They're gonna need to do the whole process. And during that time, you can advocate to the tribe, let's do a land swap. Let's all work together and make really good things happen. I know it could happen with you because here at Santa Rosa, we got Santa Rosa High School alumni. Yay. Panthers.

Thank you, Dwayne. Shauna Gauss. Hope I'm pronouncing that correctly. Shauna. And then followed by Anna Diaz, Emily Walsky, and then Mark DeBacker.

Good afternoon board members. Thank you for your time, and thank you for taking public comment on this proposal today. My name is Shawna Gauze. I'm a Sonoma County resident. I'm a parent of two children who were born and raised here.

I wanna echo previous statements of Laurel Ross, Mike Murato, Alex DiGiorgi, Brian Much, Ken Lightfoot, and others. I understand that this meeting is to receive comments on the submitted proposal. Infill is an admirable planning strategy, but not on a cultural historic heritage site so deeply important to Santa Rosa's origins. We need affordable housing and this project is needed just not at this location. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anna Diaz followed by Emily Walski. Is Anna or Anna here? Maybe hold that, see if she comes back. Maybe she had to leave. Emily Walsky.

Hi, my name is Emily Walsky. I'm the current president for the Sonoma County Historical Society, but other than that I actually also live on Montgomery Drive. I've been a Santa Rosa resident since 2013, so it doesn't seem long, but I've actually been here quite a bit because my mom's family moved here in the nineteen fifties. So I am very well of Santa Rosa's history, and I'm also very well aware that Santa Rosa has a horrible history of preservation. When I was getting my master's in public history, it was actually a perfect opportunity to write a paper on how bad it was, knocking down that courthouse, the library.

We all know preservation is not part of Santa Rosa. However, Santa Rosa has a chance, a chance to turn a page in history and start preserving the past. And not only is it preserving, but if you live on Montgomery Drive as I do, you know where this is going is not a good spot. It is a one lane road both ways, and you drive in the afternoon, I get a fork at five, I'm going down Farmers, I turn left onto Montgomery, and I'm sorry, I do do this. Alright?

We're all lined up in that middle turn lane to turn left onto Montgomery Drive. Add 300 more cars to that. That's not gonna be a good sight. We were here in the twenty seventeen fires. Okay? We saw all the ambulances going up and down the street, moving people daily. There are emergency vehicles coming up and down that street every hour. Add 300 more cars, that's precious time for people who need to get to the hospital. So there's a lot more than, you know, we need housing. Yes.

This site, the location, not a good thing. So I encourage Santa Rosa to start preserving its history. Show that you actually care for a change about something in the past. The US is celebrating its two hundred and fiftieth anniversary. What does Santa Rosa have to show for that? Not a whole heck of a lot. You know we could do more if our city council would start to say, hey let's start preserving something. Thank you.

Thank you Emily. Mark De Becker followed by Susan Milleron and Elizabeth Dale Luchs.

Hello. I'm Mark DeBacker. I'm a forty five year resident of Santa Rosa. I've been among the friends of the Creo Adobe for a very long time now. And I was a former member of the cultural heritage board for twelve years. I'm sorry, I'll try a little closer. Thank you. Alright, I'm Mark DeBacher. I'm a forty five year member, resident of Santa Rosa. I'm a former member of the Cultural Heritage Board for twelve years, most of that as vice president.

I'm very happy to see at least four former members of the board here including two chairs. My association is primarily with the Adobe, so I'm gonna start from that context. We've been privileged to work with the developer in the past to try to recognize the Adobe and appreciate their efforts on the earlier iterations. And we certainly appreciate them removing the buildings that were blocking the public line of sight in this latest iteration. The site has a lot going for it for purposes of development, but the liabilities I'm afraid outweigh the benefits of this site.

We've learned that the site has been occupied now for two thousand four hundred years with a village. It is very likely that there are perhaps hundreds of native American internments on that site. Just the activity of dealing with what they're going to find as they begin excavating is good to drive with the cost and delays on the project to a level that I really feel badly about as an architect. I really appreciate your efforts to articulate the elevations on the building, but this is really not a good spot to do it. The difficulties in dealing with what's under the ground are extreme.

Additionally, we appreciate the little over two acres that's been given to the Adobe, but that needs to be a little bit bigger as well. Now this is a concept review. So this is basically your opportunity to provide some input to the developer on how to move forward. So I'm gonna leave with a couple of thoughts is that maybe there's really a better site. Maybe the Adobe needs a little bit more land.

The site of the Adobe does have what is now likely to be a building, the remnants of a building that was done during the mission period on it, as well as the foundations of what would have been the northernmost Mexican mission when it was was being built or under the Spanish at that time. And that's going to be underneath the foundations of this new buildings. So my feelings are for that the developers got themselves a site that is gonna be very difficult to finish and not lose a lot of money on. Thank you.

Susan, followed by Elizabeth, and Anna if she's here.

Hi, my name is Susan Milliron. I have lived on Montgomery Drive for thirty five years.

I know

I don't look like it, but yes. So I am not for the building of these the townhomes, one for the adobe factor and the saving of the property. But I want to actually I'm worried more I'm more concerned about the infrastructure impact that this is going to have for traffic and safety. I live I will be living or I live at where the exit is proposed on Montgomery Drive, the secondary exit. And my main concern is how are we going to get out of our house?

Our driveway is right there, and you're adding 300 cars to us getting out. It already takes five to ten minutes to park in our driveway, so that's a big concern of mine. And it's a safety factor. We have so many accidents along that street, and people do not drive the speed limit. They drive well over the speed limit.

And the intersection at Frankette And Montgomery has, even though there's that crossing light, we've had people hit multiple times in that intersection. I'm also not a fan of the three story height. I was in my backyard and looking towards the Adobe area. And based on the height of the buildings, you could see into our backyards, especially on the people on Midway. They could see into the backyards based on where the telephone poles were and the trees.

It's an evasion of our privacy based on the windows that are there. And I'm also concerned about the intersection at Frank Het and Montgomery no, Haumann. Is it Haumann that ends at the thank you. That intersection backs up into Farmers Lane almost every evening. The traffic backs up at that light.

And putting a four way stop there just seems ridiculous. Also, are you going to require them to upgrade the underground facilities, like sewer and water? Because the system has been there for number of years, probably hasn't been upgraded in a very long time, and that's going to have a huge impact on our the people that are in that neighborhood.

You Susan. Elizabeth?

Hello, yes.

Anna, if she is here, but Elizabeth is the last card. You hear me?

All right.

Yes, can. You, Great.

Thank you very much. Good afternoon, acting chair and members of this design review and preservation board. I'm an associate instructor at Santa Rosa Junior College. I am relatively new to the area. My family's been here forty years, but I'm pretty new.

We left San Jose about four years ago because of some of these same kind of developments. It's not that they're not needed. Whether they're affordable or not, I don't know, but I will say that Santa Rosa's a lovely place, and this area, I would say, it's important that we do preserve this sacred site as well as this adobe, this Maria Carrillo adobe. It's one of the last remaining physical links to the early history of this region. This Maria Ignacio Lopez de Carrillo is a foundational figure in Sonoma County's past.

So once the integrity of this site is compromised, it cannot be restored. A project of this scale, 163 condos on 14 acres with only 16 affordable, and we're not sure what these prices are, that means 10%, it does seem that we are we are risking something. I think we do need housing, I agree, but not here, along with a lot of the other people that have spoken. So under the California Environmental Quality Act, the city has a responsibility to fully evaluate and avoid significant impacts to historical and cultural resources. This means taking a hard look at whether this project of this size and in this location is appropriate and whether there are feasible alternatives that would mean housing goals without sacrificing our heritage.

We're not choosing between the past and the future. We can and must do both. Santa Rosa has many sites for housing that do not require the loss of a site like this. Once it's gone, it's gone. I urge you to protect the Maria Carrillo Adobe and the sacred Pomo And Miwok site. We require a path forward that respects both our need for housing and our responsibility to preserve the history that defines this community. Thank you very much.

Thank you. And one last comment, Abigail, if she's here.

Thank you. My name is Abigail Zoger. I am a resident of Santa Rosa and an instructor at Santa Rosa Junior College and lead of North Bay Transit Riders, a group that advocates for transit in the North Bay, and I'd like to challenge those people here who are saying that this is in favor of housing but not in this site because it's a very easy thing to say but we really need housing in Santa Rosa and we don't need it in an abstract way. We need it and we need it now. And meetings like this delay and drag on the process and that adds to the expense.

So the cost of housing in Santa Rosa, the cost of housing in California is a direct result of these types of meetings. First of all, we're looking at maybe $100,000,000 worth of property. Is somebody going to buy that property from the developers and exchange it for another piece of property? I don't know. It seems unlikely.

The city of Santa Rosa has recently closed most of its middle schools, junior high schools, so if those of you in this room really, really want housing and really think this is the wrong site, why don't you recommend and work on a property swap with Slater Junior High School and this piece of property, and have the development be at Slater Junior High School, which doesn't have historical significance, does not have Native American artifacts, and I don't know if it's worth $100,000,000 I don't know if it's the same value as the other piece of property, but you have to recognize that the church didn't preserve the adobe, nobody else has preserved the adobe, it's going to take money to preserve the adobe, and the city of Santa Rosa doesn't have any money. So these property developers have offered to do something that's not enough for what people want. So how are you going to get from where you are now with nothing to what you actually want, which is quite a lot? And I understand that the property developers are only offering half of what you want, nothing comparable with what people would like. But how are you going to get there?

It doesn't seem realistic. But maybe the city would swap some of its middle schools, and maybe the developers would like to use that piece of property because they wouldn't have to pay as much money for the delays for construction. Something to think about. If you really, really are in favor of housing, then you need to do something to create housing instead of just saying no to housing. Thank you.

Oh, is this Anna? Yep. Oh, an additional comment. Okay, one additional comment. We don't have any more cards, but we'll have one more comment. Sorry? So go ahead please. Thank you. Hi,

my name is Denise Hill. I'm the current president of the Santa Rosa Historical Society. A lot of what I submitted in a letter today has been covered, so I'll just try to do excerpts from, from the letter I submitted for the record. But, I just want to make clear what our position as a historical society is on this particular property. We want to go on record in full support of full preservation of the entire 14.9 acre site that includes the Creo Adobe.

The property is the most historically significant property in Santa Rosa. It is exceedingly important to local Native Americans, particularly Pomo and Coast Miwok, the larger Mexican American community, educators, professional historians, archaeologists, university and junior college faculty, and countless city residents. The site is where Santa Rosa began centuries ago and offers an extensive and sensitive cultural heritage record that needs to be respected. The Creo Rancho and its adobe building constructed in 1838 were at the heart of the vast Cabeza De Santa Rosa land grant awarded to Maria Curio almost two hundred years ago. Later one of Maria's sons, Julio Curio, was instrumental in laying out a grid in selling his share of the Cabeza De Santa Rosa property for what became the town of Santa Rosa.

Besides the Curio family, the property's history includes notable nineteenth century pioneer families such as the Hoennes, the McDonald's, the Hammonds. The significance of this property has been recognized by multiple government agencies. It is a Santa Rosa Historic Landmark, has been listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. As we add our voice to the voices of so many Santa Rosa residents who have been asking for preservation of this site for at least the past ninety years. There is a 1937 article where the press democrat is pushing for saving this site.

We ask the city to declare its intent to protect the entire site and take action to preserve it as a historic park open to the public so generations of future Santa Rosans can learn the unique and significant history of our city.

Thanks very much. Having no additional cards, and no one else at the podium, I will close public comment on item 9.1. And I will bring the item back to the board for comments and or questions, but comments for the applicants teams who provide feedback on the design for the Creekside Village. Once again, Drew, I'm going to start down with you. Adam,

do we start just with questions first and then do comments or we're combining them?

I'm going to combine them as we already did. I'll pull the rest of the board. Do people have a lot of comment or a

lot of

questions? Additional questions from before?

Just have a couple.

Start with

the questions and then your comments. Sure.

Just a few questions. Thank you everybody for your everybody for your comments including the presenters. A couple quick comments for the architects, developers. Have you guys looked at the the minimum setback from the the creek? And what is that distance? Do you are you confirmed that it's it's meets the requirements?

Hi, I'm Jim Fain with Carlisle Macy, civil engineer. I've been on the project for twenty five years. I want to just confirm that we did survey the creek in 2010 and it conforms to the zoning requirements, setback requirements per the zoning code. And we've confirmed that.

Okay.

Maybe a couple other questions that might relate to you. Just a quick summary of the public connections. Can you summarize the creek trail what's public and what's private as far as starting the property?

Well, original intention with the original development was to turn over the park and the multiuse trail over to the city. It was a 10 foot multiuse path, and it was part of the overall park development, which included about 6.2 acres, which included the creek, the Correo site, and the multi use trail. That was the original design. I think it's the developers' intent to follow those original conditions if that's what the city wants.

And then there's some areas located on the landscape plan that are called proposed amenity areas. What kind of things are you guys imagining for those areas?

Hi, I'm Brianna Morrison. I'm a landscape architect with Carl Macey. I've been working on this project since 2014. The proposed amenity areas on the landscape site plan would include things like tot lots for children, so small play structures, picnic areas, maybe game tables, lawn spaces, just a variety of amenities that we typically do in multi family housing that provides spaces for people to commune with other neighbors in the development. There might even be barbecues and that kind of thing.

Picnic, play, seating, passive and active recreation.

That's it for my questions. I'll come back with some comments.

Would you like to hear comments now or do you want think about them for a second? Okay, we'll come back, Joe. Ingrid, you're on the hot seat.

All right, we'll start also with questions. So I was really impressed by the number of professional opinions from archaeologists, including Mr. Lightfoot, who came here, and I wondered if the city, the planning staff could tell me, were there reports regarding the prehistoric remains and how the City would look upon developing on a site that had an abundance of prehistory in it, and the kind of damage that even an investigation might cause to those artifacts in the previous applications that were submitted.

I can comment on that also if you need some back history. Do you want me to go ahead, Sheila? Okay, so in prior versions of the project that had gone through prior design review and various submittals, obviously we will need to go through these processes again, but just to give some back history, there was an archaeological report prepared in 2008 that identified the prehistoric site and the historic site. So there's the Pomo Village and there's the Adobe. That report identified them as two separate locations.

And we also, as part of the project, have to do a lot of mitigation and monitoring measures. So prior, there were proposed mitigations for those two different sites. In the Creo Adobe site, it has a recorded master plan that was approved by City Council. Then it was amended in 2016, I believe. That that park had to be built under a prior agreement which would have to be renegotiated with the city.

It required that the park be developed prior to occupancy of the proposed project at the time. And as part of the development of the park and the mitigation measures, it included restoration and stabilization of the Creo Adobe. So a lot of those reports that were previously prepared I think would be revisited. That would probably be a requirement. And then I think the intent would be to do all of the things necessary to preserve those sites in the Adobe.

My other question is, as the project is proposed currently, is the developer proposing by right development? In other words, notwithstanding the fact that there are cultural resources there which obviously I've heard, I think we've all heard how people feel about them and the great love and attachment they have to that and respect for the history of Santa Rosa and keeping and preserving that. Notwithstanding that, would this otherwise be considered by right development for the developer? They would have the right to develop this proposal as drawn out.

I can answer that question. Jessica Jones, Deputy Director of Planning. So this project will require design review so we'll have at least that entitlement as part of it. It does not require a conditional use permit so it is allowed by right in that sense but design review would be required.

Okay, those are my questions.

Sure.

I have no questions at this time.

And I have no questions at the time. We'll bring it back for comments.

Drew? Back in the hot seat, man.

Okay. I once again, I'll reiterate, I really appreciate everybody's feedback tonight, and I'm really focusing on my job, is to look at the Santa Rosa City design guidelines and try to give feedback on things that I think that meet the guidelines and those that don't. We have other architects on the board, I'll try to stay out of my lane on that one. But just some items that I observed that I felt really matched with the guidelines were the two car garage and also the fact that the garages are not fronting the street but facing back. As someone else mentioned, just infilling, notwithstanding obviously the conditions of the site, more middle infill housing, I think is a support of what the city is looking for.

And indooroutdoor deck spaces, those were also something that felt reflected the the guidelines. Some issues I see just from from generally, the initial concepts are just general massing. I appreciate the attempt to get some differences between the buildings, but them all being the same height and less differences in the roof height, that's something that the guidelines will kind of point to trying to get more difference and more variety there. I know that for projects that are over 100 units, there's other types of requirements or recommendations that come into play. I think that some of the common areas are being met, I have another comment about that in a minute, but I believe like a common building for the tenants is usually recommended when you're a project of this size.

I noticed that, you know, there was an aim to keep heritage trees, etcetera, on the site. I I do think that that would be challenge with the construction of the site and just being kind of realistic about that, I think, is important. I I think I would highly encourage reviewing the security issues on the portions of the site facing the creek, particularly the open space, the open commons area, and also just the security of the units themselves facing the creek. As we all know, it's an unfortunate reality that there can be there could be security issues in that types of those types of conditions in Santa Rosa. I think that covers my questions.

I'm sure the other board members will get some other comments in there.

Thank you, Drew. Ingrid, comments?

Yes, I just thought of one more question actually. CEQUA, which the project might have to be reviewed for conformance to CEQA, it doesn't qualify as an infill housing for this infill exemption because it's over five acres. CEQUA helps us to protect habitats of endangered species and it restricts development on lands that have archaeological resources. So is there a mechanism for land that is zoned for this type of development because as Jessica was mentioning, it's by right in that it doesn't need a conditional use permit. I'm just thinking of the concerns of the public and what they said tonight.

Is there a mechanism for transferring the development rights to another location so that the value of this location for the developer could be transferred somewhere more appropriate? And that the city could then assume ownership of the park and stewardship of it?

That's certainly something that we could look into if that request was presented to us but at this point what we have is a project on this proposed parcel that we have to react to so if that's something that the developer wants to pursue we certainly can have that conversation with them.

How much purview does the Graden Rancheria, the figure, have to influence your final decision on this development?

So the city is required to go through the consultation process with them which we will do and you know their recommendations you know do take part in the the sequel review process and inform the mitigation measures and oftentimes the development layout. They are a reviewing agency that we work with and ultimately the city has the final decision on the project.

Should I go into comments now? Okay. Just from a high level view, I think that I see this project as one that really separates the pedestrians and the bicycles within the development from the cars, and I can understand that. Automobiles are a big part of our life and particularly for the type of housing that this is proposing larger units and ownership units potentially, or it looks like it's ownership, there may be two to three cars living unit. But I'm a little concerned about the lack of variety of housing proposed.

Plex housing, I think the goal of the city for a missing middle ordinance is to provide housing for a wide variety of demographics in the residents. Here we just have large families who potentially would be from one demographic, a single type of homeowner with a certain range of income, for instance. So I would encourage additional unit type that potentially has ADU or other options for housing. Also, the space between the front doors of units that face each other seem to be really symmetrically or directly opposing each other and lined up. Are those front yards separated by the path and the path between them delineates a parcel line?

Or is that a common space that all people within the two rows would share so that you could landscape that in a way that's cohesive? Then I think one thing that could help the perception of the pedestrian walking through that little village of homes is to create an end cap where that is either a gateway or other wall or edge defining structure and I know that this is this is at a concept level and that may be in the back of your mind and also potentially even cap the ends of some of these rows of houses with a house that's turned perpendicularly for instance. So you're not just seeing the ends or the sides of houses. Also I have a little bit of a concern about the wall that is being proposed which is the charred wood that refers back to a Japanese type of finished material, exterior cladding. I think there are opportunities here to refer more directly to the adobe and the architecture of the history of this site.

Also, I agree with the comment from Drew that it might be really difficult to preserve the heritage trees. I understand what you're doing here but during construction preservation of large trees with extensive root systems is very difficult and the houses seem to be located very close to the canopy line of those trees. And finally, I'd recommend that the developer include not only the park and the preservation of the creek but also a multimodal safe routes to school vision zero strategy that incorporates safety for pedestrians and bicycles. Montgomery Village is a unique resource right across the street, it's a walking mall, you're not just parking, you're walking from place to place. This project, if it does happen, can really help to invigorate the pedestrian experience of this neighborhood.

Those are my comments.

Thank you, Ingrid. Cher?

So I want to say that yes, Santa Rosa needs housing, absolutely. I think it's very unfortunate that there is this tension between our history, which is very important, and our future, which is also very important. Looking at the architecture, I agree with a couple of things that Ingrid said here that it's the same thing over and over again. There's very little variety in it and it to me begins to look like just cookie cutter. I appreciate the palette, I appreciate the articulation, but I think if the project moves forward that more can be done that each unit doesn't look exactly opposite to the unit next to it or exactly like the one two doors down.

I think you've got a really heavy lift here with the history versus the future. I hope that there's a possibility of something like a land swap where something really nice, I think you've done a really nice job here, where you could do something like this really nice without the angst of wiping out something that cannot be replaced. Thank you. And I also really want to say that what a powerhouse group of people here. I've never been in vicinity to so many archaeologists and I like it, thank you.

Thank you, Sher. Nate?

Yeah, thanks to the applicant, thanks for all the public comment as well. I had a few comments mostly about the architecture. Looking at the application as we received here conceptually, I want to start with positives. Yes, there's a housing need and we have housing proposal here. This is an infill site consistent with that goal of the city, not to develop in the perimeter or create sprawl.

This is a highly transit oriented location. I like the idea of using places in the city rather than seeing them in disrepair for decades, unfortunately in this case. As far as the compatibility with design guidelines, I think the unit designs, individual unit designs seem to respond to the city's design guidelines well as individual units, one unit itself. The paint color palette seems appropriate in that regard. The Adobe preservation be included is very appreciated and key to any proposal obviously.

The creek area improvements also have the potential to improve safety in that area which is also much much needed. The units, particularly on the perimeter that are organized with their eyes facing the creek, facing the adobe, facing the street, I think that's fundamental to any proposal here. Not that the residents would be responsible for safety, but that's generally a good strategy for creating a safe environment at the edges of the property. And I think the signal with shared entry to the church at Haumann would be a plus because those driveways now between Haumann and farmers that go in and out of the church property. I think there's a one way in to Montgomery Village.

Those create quite a lot of turmoil on the streets and the signal with appropriate traffic study has the potential to improve that condition on that block along St. Eugene's property. Areas where I think the proposal could be improved. I'll kind of piggyback on this a little bit. These are my prepared comments but the idea of the development being product is hard to swallow a little bit, and I think that rubber stamping quality of the site plan is evident.

And it seems to me that if there's a site in Santa Rosa that deserves a really specific approach, This might be the most important one, or one of them certainly, from a historical standpoint definitely. Yet it's a kind of rubber stamp design. So I'd love to see I think there's an opportunity to bring something if there is a proposal for this property for housing that it brings something more nuanced. A couple of thoughts along those lines in the site. I heard a few items already discussed.

There's two kinds of ways the streets appear to be working here. We have these kind of there may be more than two, but we have street areas that have garages on both sides and three story walls, all cars, no person door into any building. And then there's moments where there's a sidewalk on one side and garages on the other. Those obviously have to perform the duty of all the pedestrian circulation across the property. So it should be really carefully articulated in an application how people with children especially are moving from units to the street and then accessing their safe routes to school.

There's not a mention of the really here, I want to hear like actually in an application real discussion of the pedestrian, the bicycle culture of this part of our city. It's a real emphasis of how people live here. I think it's very important. In terms of density, think the bottom line is that the development with these units that are three and four bedroom, I think it's too dense in terms of footprint. Not necessarily unit count, don't know.

That's for a later date. But the footprints are very large and they don't leave much flexibility to develop a strategy to deal with the nuance of the site. So it still feels early, obviously it is early in the proposal, but it has overall it definitely has this product or of rubber stamp quality, I'd say, that's not a good thing, That could be developed. It's not a completely lost opportunity yet. Mentioned children in the cars.

On the material board, I do think the paint or finish colors seem appropriate. I noticed the wood finish not on it wasn't on the presentation. It must have got scrubbed off the presentation, but it was on our packet. So I think the wood finish might have been not included or not intended to be included, right? But the paint colors for the siding and the stucco finishes seem to me I understood the logic behind the presentation on those.

Units having raised children in a development very similar to this is our first home in Sonoma County in Petaluma. These units, the way that they're designed, they have no ground space that I can understand. So other than this kind of two foot stoop, it's not enough space at the ground to give to families. There's one row that shows porches. It's a I can't number, see but it's one of the eight plexes.

It has porches on it, and I think it's only there to kind of deal with a grade change, but I would strongly urge that the applicant think about the intermediate space between the back of the walkways that are shared and the front doors and find a way to give people gardens, spaces where their young ones can be and be protected. Maybe they need a picket boundary, some kind of edge. There's lots of strategies in the world of housing design to deal with these places, to create stoops, to create ways to differentiate site, the visibility across the units. I think Ingrid mentioned something along those lines. And that will be really important ultimately to a development that it has a little more thoughtfulness at the ground.

I don't have any other comments about the units. In the big picture, I think the project is a really big lift. It's similar. To be honest, it's a huge challenge. I know it's gone through a process with the city before.

Was a long time ago. Things change between it's kind of just this nexus site for our city between the Spanish colonial history, there's fire areas across the highway, there's traffic and transportation with Highway 12 having to go use farmers, there's the creek that floods that has to be managed. There are so many environmental elements as well. But I think the overarching challenge ultimately may come down to the indigenous history of this property and its centrality to this community, And that's just a comment and perhaps a caution or a suggestion that there's sort of more of an active leadership aspect to your proposal in that way. Thank you.

Thank you, Nate. I will try and keep my comments somewhat brief and I'll repeat what my fellow board members have said. Thanks very much for for bringing the proposal to us. Thank you staff for bringing this as well, and thanks all for all the members of the public for your comments and providing us with context and history and seeing the passions that are involved with this, you know, our cultural history and this proposal and this this parcel in particular. I I'm I when I first joined this board, it was generally with the idea of alleviating the affordability in the housing crisis or in the area and in California.

And and so I am I'm pretty much always supportive of housing projects. However, underneath all of my land use decisions come with with environmental and social justice as well. All of these things are wrapped up together. So for for this proposal and this site, one, I mean, my comments are going to be be couched in where there's gonna be discovery when we get into any sort project or proposal, actual project that in a sequel process, we're really getting to some studies, we're really getting to see what's there. Right now, we know that there there there's history and we have studies, but when we really get into this, then we'll really know what you guys are going to be dealing with and what the city is going to have to be dealing with and what as a community we're going to be are going to get to deal with as well.

So to to to to look at the design in particular, with this site, does since it is a very particular site, there is historical resource there. I'm not going into the to the a lot of the archaeological resources, but as proposed, the the design that you have given us is heavily focused on the housing and and has the carve out for the the historical structures that are there. I would, you know, kind of thinking of, you know, archaeology archaeology aside, for this for this site and the importance of the site and where it is in the city, I think that you are proposing too much density. I think that if you are going to move forward, if you flip the the proposal and emphasize the history and the cultural rather than the the the housing and the the development of the parcel, This could be a potentially a a project that is has a housing component to a to a park like some kind of development. I don't know what that would look like.

Obviously, anything that is going to be here needs to be tribal driven as well. And call with the the cultural resources that are here, that is one way I could see that potentially looking at at at a proposal on the site is to drastically de decrease the density, make this into more of a park like setting, have this act as what the actual parcel really access in at this part of town, and why the the the town was was founded there is is a linchpin and a node for the entire city. You know, there are roads that go through there. There's confluence of creeks. There there everything is is involved here.

And so how can you, through your design, express that? Bring every bring the rest of the city into this site. Once again, this is a massive massive lift for you guys. It's gonna take some really creative thought and yeah. We'll we'll have to see what is discovered throughout the the secret process if there is a proposal.

For the design itself, I do feel since it is concepts, you know, you're you're providing the, you know, some idea of the massing, some idea of the the unit count that's here. Once again, pretty dense, pretty tall. The circulation feels very cramped. As Nate mentioned, thinking about how people are gonna get around the site, how kids are gonna get around the site. This is a great site for families to live in.

It's close to a bunch of schools. It's right close to Montgomery Village, close to Parks. This is a highway for people going biking in Annadelle and and Howarth Park. How can you how can you some use this site somewhat to subvert the, you know, Highway 12 corridor that's Caltrans and make this more of a city pedestrian or just focus place? A lot of that is bringing it back to the site, bringing it back to the culture, bringing it back to the history.

The design as you presented doesn't doesn't reference Adobe's. I mean, that's a pretty facile, you know, kind of design, know, bone to toss out there, but it at least references the history of the site. Basically, I I think that if you are going to propose housing and development on here, how can you recede into the site and how can you respect the site? How can you respect the ecology? This is all right on the the bank of the creeks as well.

There's incredible resources down in there. This is a, you know, as the the city is talking about daylighting the city hall area of of town, This is a a a an opportunity to daylight the cultural history of Santa Rosa and the founding of the city here, and to daylight the ecology as well. All of this is is related. So I wish you lots of luck in thinking about this. From a designer's perspective, this is a fascinating site.

You could come up with something amazing here, Really amazing. Talk about a a a a cultural asset for the city that it creates destination that that announces so much. This doesn't have to just be agita. It could also be inspiration as well. And so go back to the drawing board and think about what you can do, how you can work with all of these communities to see what we're doing here. Yeah.

Those are

my comments. Any other comments, questions from the board? With that, we'll be moving on to item 10 which is adjournment. Thanks everyone very much for coming.