City Council - Regular Meeting

Just a site visit and go all around. Same, site visit.

yeah all right any other questions for staff and then we have an applicant presentation yeah um Michelle the the single family housing flexibility the detached housing flexibility that the staff allowed in there is that potentially allowing for like a duplex triplex kind of quadplex kind of thing is that kind of what you're going for there maybe

John Pimentel, Presumably, if we adopt that that'll be well before the the master plan comes before any kind of city right, so that would also be something that would have to comply.

Yeah, I actually have a couple of questions. Well, we can maybe we get to this extension thing a little bit later. But Michelle, if you go back to the present, sorry, I'm bouncing between a couple of different parts of my screen here. If you go back to the presentation slide labeled housing, it's approximately slide 16 that shows the The 230 units, the less than or equal to, I guess, and you may have said this, and I may have been bouncing between a couple of different documents here. I'm not really sure how I understand how. Less than or equal to is consistent with the resolution. Resolution

But it implies they could do less. And my understanding is 230 is a minimum. So how can less than 230 be compliant?

We just want to make sure for the record, then the staff is telling us that actually what it says in the document we're asked to approve tonight is different than what's on the screen here. And that those are minimums. That's what we're passing tonight.

So that's greater than or equal to. Yeah.

Okay. All right. So my other couple questions here. I think you've answered, I guess if you go back to the the defensible space language on that wildfire mitigation slide that Councilor Platt was just asking about. So creation of defensible space, I mean, I think to Councilor Platt's point, if we're not, I'm not sure when we're expecting submission of the master plan, but if that does come after the council has acted on the likelihood of the defensible space coming forward, and I know the staff is working on that now, If that has been adopted prior to submission of their master plan applicatio

They're not required to do that. They could do that if they choose to. That's the way this is written.

Okay, so my question is, what is creation of defensible space mean? Do we have a way we can interpret that in the absence of an adopted defensible space code that actually applies to this specific development, depending on how the timeframes of all those things work out?

So maybe I'm being really dense here, but the way I read what is on the screen, it says that a wildfire mitigation plan prepared by Professional Forester is one of the options that they could choose to do, that they could choose landscaping and hardscaping and avoid the wildfire plan. So is this another thing where what's on the screen is not actually what's in the other documents? I guess you're confusing me. I'm sorry about that. That's the way this is written.

I don't read it as a requirement. I guess I don't know what other counselors think, but it seems a little confusing to me and a little like, if we don't have create defensible space stuff developed and have real criteria that, and then we're going to have arguments from between experts of what qualifies for it and just create problems for ourselves. So we haven't figured that out. It seems like maybe we should.

Yeah, I have two questions. The first one is, can you just talk a little bit about the phasing? I mean, it sounds like you're close on the master plan, so maybe you have a little bit more of a sense of that than what's described here in the photos and sort of, you know, roughly when we're going to start to see the production of the affordable units. You know, in that first half and just and I think I'm trying to get it like the timing when when are we likely to see some of this stuff to start to happen at least once the master plans approved.

And timeframe wise, I mean, do you imagine it's going to take a year roughly after approval of the master plan or shorter than that for some of the first construction to start?

Okay. And so I think you answered that might be my second question. And that is about the master plan schedule. So you have to wait until the DLC D process has completed right in there. They've approved it. And we've gotten the county also their approval on the UGB extent expansion correct before you can submit that app master plan application.

okay okay thank you thank you so much any other follow-up questions for staff before we get to public testimony okay all right and i think we have mayor keidler i do have one question for staff okay go ahead sorry um so the improvements on knot road um can you all kind of outline show us um can staff show us Joe DiNetto, M.D. : That kind of geographic scope of where those improvements are going to occur that are going to be triggered by this development as it moves forward.

So there's nothing as far as we know from the information that we have to date and based on that transportation analysis memo, which I know is preliminary that triggers any improvements that are required at the China hat, not road intersection. Is that correct?

Yeah. I go around by myself with my dog.

I mean, my question may be more for staff, but you guys can start with an answer. And that is when I look at the map here, it looks to me like Woodside Road is a pretty obvious way to connect to Knott Road and that I would expect a fair number of people when the development's built. to use woodside to connect to not road so i'm just i'm wondering why it was left out of the transportation improvement requirements um so yeah so woodside road will be improved to a local city street throughout our development i'm asking about a roundabout

Sure. So I sent an email to included Eric and others and so maybe it can be displayed for a possible revision to the wildfire policy. I think it's 187. I guess my concern is that It's 11 dash 182. my concern is that. We could be in a situation where well, what I'd like to see is this development basically be required to. You know, do something if not similar to very close to a combination of our. I'm home hardening code as well as the likely defensible space code that's going to come on and they're not, I think they're not too distant future. That would be my expectation. And I'm a little worr

Yeah, mine is similar to this, but it goes a little bit farther. So if you put mine up there, I think it reflects the changes that staff made about putting that reference to the wildfire mitigation plan up front that it has to be part of it. I think it makes the language a lot clearer. When I read it, but then I had some additional stuff.

is there if somebody else has a comment that they can make well it'll take or do you have it yeah we have an email yeah Ashley's got it there okay so this is Mike's edit that incorporates what staff already included about a professional consultant and then can you explain what's different here no so then it says that um show um shows how urban wildfire risk will be mitigated through creation of defensible space beyond minimum required use of construction and material and building materials beyond the minimum required and it was that second phrase construction materials that's already in what s

I agree. I mean, I guess that's my my fundamental problem is I don't know what the definition of create defensible spaces. So if we're you know, we want to take some extra time and have our staff work on that and come back to us in a couple of weeks with some better language that gives us something that's a little bit more it's easier to objectively define. I guess my assumption is that there's a good chance that the master plan is not going to be it's going to be submitted before defensible space code is adopted so i'm just trying to get us somewhere where where we get some of the defensible

I understand that. Get that part about defensible space, but I don't even know why we're proposing. I mean, that use of construction and building materials beyond the minimum requires they got to do more than than that code.

The idea with this defensible space thing that we're looking to adopt is there is going to be no place that is safe in this city if we don't apply it all around. Correct.

Right. But I guess my point is, and this is where I was trying to get to with this, is that defensible space in this community doesn't protect any other communities around it. So when we do a defensible space code, it's going to have to be This gets to Mike's point as well. It's not just going to be homes that are built in the future. It's going to be homes that have been built, and those homes are going to have to be treated year in and year out, and it's going to be a sustained build. Mayor, I like your point regarding that. Because we're going to all have to, throughout the city, have to do

Right. And only new homes are going to be built to R3.7. Correct. but all the other homes are at least gonna have two of those pillars, education and defensible space when we get done passing the very needed defensible space code in the city. So we'll get two out of three.

what that means and the applicant has to live with that right so that's so that that that would be fine with me to put that language in here that is my goal is to get it something that is a little bit tighter on this development having to comply with that defensible space code that's likely to be adopted soon but we I don't want to um Brett KenCairn, Set up a situation where they're essentially able to get around that because the policy we're adopting here isn't quite clear about it right, and so I would say I don't think it doesn't need to be defensible space beyond the minimum required.

I mean, I just wanted to make the point that my understanding is that the original resolution resolution 3144, whatever the right number is actually explicitly gave the council. The authority to extend that deadline. Um, and so that that's sort of the basis for how and why we're able to do that tonight.

I guess I heard the insurance. Mike Noce, Mgmt. Point as well and i've heard that before and and I want to tell you that that we hear that as well. Mike Noce, Mgmt. One of the things we're doing in this city is we've adopted that fire hardening code we're going to do this defensible space code. Mike Noce, Mgmt. We are leading the state and, in many cases, nation by trying to control our emissions as it relates. to climate change, which was brought up as well earlier this evening. So we are trying to do what we can locally, only locally, hoping to inspire others to be a part of a larger insuran

Yeah, I just wanted to echo in particular, I think really all the comments, but what Councilor Francosa and Perkins said, and that is, you know, I share a lot of concerns about our ability to keep up with the infrastructure needed, you know, from a day-to-day perspective, and especially when it comes to roads. I think that's the hardest one for us to pay for, and there's a lot of it That's a lot of the challenge is how and when do we pay for this stuff in the sequencing. But we're really going to take a close look at Knot Road and what other kinds of improvements we need to make. And look hard

Okay. Any questions? We're signed District 45.

How hard, one of the things I talked about was the illumination levels, measuring the illumination levels. If somebody comes in and they go, hey, I got a sign for you, how hard is it for you to go, this is the illumination level of that sign based on the lighting that they would use?

So our overall lighting code could address that.

And my last very brief question is how hard would it be to put in, as suggested by the Dark Skies folks, a turn it off when your business is closed type thing in our code?

And enforcement would probably be client, primarily complaint, complaint-driven. Yes. Right. Okay. Thanks. That's it.

um and so I um it will be supporting this um as as written and um will not be supporting any changes to this okay other thoughts Steve uh so I think where I would the amendment that I would offer uh is that that business traffic is not going to be driven to those folks or wouldn't reliably be driven to those businesses after they're closed for the year. Yes. And so for me, turning the light off an hour after they're closed, Greg Rutledge, they're not going to get any more business that night, so I think I think that's a reasonable compromise and then i'm going to come back around for dark skie

I would support that. I guess my concern is just that we're going to be repeating a bunch of work and then changing some rules again in the not too distant future, assuming a council in sometime next quarter one or late early quarter two of next year adopts dark skies as an actual goal and gets onto the work plan. So it just concerns me a little bit that we're doing some things that are at cross purposes here. And we didn't have an opportunity to provide a little bit more direction on this. As a council, I support, I guess what council or Francis is proposing.

Right, it's just more of a mess. Trying to fix a mess by creating some mess.

still responsive to all the process and complexity stuff what the part that's not responsive to is because it's trying to balance another goal which is um concerns about the dark sky right and so and and as i said not By fixing something now, then create this other thing that we're going to then fix. Somebody's going to fix again in 9 to 12 months from now, and then we're going backwards on something. It just seems like that the order here is we're a little out of order. So if we can fix the process issues and some of the complexity issues, and we're going to retain that part. but we're saying

Can we add a 60-year or longer affordability period as an additional bonus point thing? I'm sorry, Mike.

Sure. Can we add as an additional bonus point or whatever you call the three things at the end there, permanent supportive housing, the AMI priority and accessibility, can we add a lengthened term greater than 30 years?

I think the way I looked at that though is that during surge events, we were actually creating more parking, you know, in Brooks and Wall, Bond and Wall.

it is late but because we because we're moving events to this space so I understood there was also more parking in those cases so I'm in support yeah I mean I'm generally I'm generally supportive of it as well I mean it looks like maybe about a million dollars of this is actually bond financed am I right about that because the rest is coming out of reserve funds is that something Eric you can speak to

and events-based project from competitive video. Adopt the findings submitted to council and authorize the use of the construction manager, general contractor, alternative delivery method.

Mayor Mrakas, You know okay you guys I moved to authorize the city manager to sign amendment number two to personal services agreement with Walker may see llc. Mayor Mrakas, and substantially the form presented to counsel for final design and construction contract administration services for the North mirror pond parking and events based project. Joe Mahon, Increase in the contract price by 666,943 dollars for revised not to exceed contract amount of 902,586 dollars. Cllr Rachel Gilliland, Second.

Okay, do it. I move for the 1st reading of an ordinance repealing ordinance number and s dash 2554.