Remarks by Brad Steward
115 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 1 of 5
- Play at 27:09
“A couple of things, actually, if I can go back a step just to understand exactly where we're at in sequencing here. So in the last meeting, the motion approved the application, correct?”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 27:26
“Okay, and then we have a shot at coming back and making a couple of adjustments to it, but we're not rewriting a brand new motion.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 27:41
“Yeah, okay. Yeah, I mean, my view is pretty simple. I think we need to tell them what to do and not how to do it. I'm less concerned about the design work and everything because there's a larger theme here. The what to do is please ensure the visibility and the consistency. to me the Planning Commission landed in a bunch of different places it was actually hard to tell like who's what is the what is the opinion or the Historical Commission sorry Preservation Commission what was hard for me on that is they they didn't hold a vote or give us really anything consistent so on one hand I…”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 28:36
“Yeah, and so to me to be specific inside of that elevation Hey, here's the elevation that everybody seems to agree is the relevant elevation how you accomplish that is up to you, you know within your design Standards of what you guys are doing.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 29:12
“The fine line, I guess, there is being the design police and allowing them to thematically do what they do, which I think has done pretty well and become kind of the de facto center of town. and so if we need to wrap a few things around that yes but i just think we have to be kind of careful with our guidance there not to turn into landscape designers here i agree with you a certain part of our purview is to say do this not that relative to you know plant work and the landscaping plan but um uh to me they should have some a little bit of an envelope to determine. Say, for instance, it's going…”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 30:59
“Yeah, yeah. I think we're in agreement on that.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 47:15
“Yeah, Jeremy, Commissioner Stewart here. From my perspective, the main thing for you to keep in mind is all of the Preservation Commission people agreed there needed to be a fence. The issue they couldn't agree on is how see-through is it? That's really what it came down to in the most simple terms. We want a fence, but we don't know how see-through it needs to be. So in that regard, I think some of what you've shown looked like it blocked a lot. You could probably do less there. But I think if you understand that on a high level, there are enough talented people in the group to make that…”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 48:47
“And function like a fence, function like a fence and look like a screen.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 49:43
“And then, Jeremy, I have a question, if we could, just jumping to the parking issue. Is it intended that El Roblar and the spa would have a parking contract between them, an agreement between them?”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 50:10
“That might be one condition along the lines of what you were saying. Those two parties.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 50:16
“Well, but they're different entities and I think we've got to bring in the kind of protection that Katrina's talking about. So those two parties, I don't know, Jeremy, whether they're different entities, but I don't think it really matters. They're actually probably two different operations at some point. That's the way they're described here anyways. But maybe between those two parties, there is a shared parking agreement that is part of the conditions for this. And the two parties are the 107 property and El Roblar. And then if there is a change to that in the future along the lines of some…”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 51:03
“Yeah, because really the, here's the, Here's the loophole, you know, a little bit for you guys, Jeremy. El Roblar is not really applying for this. The spa is, but the spa is using El Roblar's parking. So that's, I think, the heart of Katrina and some of the other people who've talked about their concern. As El Roblar, you're not really here doing anything. You're asking for the spa. As an organization or as an operation, but you're telling us you're going to use another operations Parking so we just have to link those two knowing similar owners cap tables, whatever it is. I”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 51:58
“It's a service. It's like an SLA. It's a service-level agreement where... El Roblar is providing a service of the service of parking air quotes. Yeah the service of parking so it's a service level agreement between the two parties and”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 56:53
“You can actually look at this through a really simple lens. Does El Roblar have a burden here? In your guys' eyes? Does El Roblar have a burden here?”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 57:11
“What do you mean? Yeah, does Elroblar have a burden to the spa?”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 57:20
“It does have a burden. It's providing it with parking. So it has a burden, and 107 gets a benefit. And that's why I think we need a contract, just a simple shared parking agreement, to Katrina's point, that links those two. Because if that burden and benefit change, okay and we do you know we i think everybody is in support of this and everybody feels like it's it's going to be a good project but i think we do owe it to the community to say hey we put a little stop in the door because things change but when they change it'll come back to us anyway And it should in that new party at that new…”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 58:16
“What it adds is what Katrina said. It adds that a party that is not at the table here in their application, a party that is not at the table is going to deliver a benefit to the thing we are being asked to approve. I have trouble with the fact that we have an attorney here while we're all amateur law doing this.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 59:31
“Yeah, to me it's a convenience that the parties are essentially the same, and I don't see it as a burden. I see it as just closing a loop for the community members who've asked. And things change. Things happen. Parties that own different properties do evolve and change.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 1:00:55
“That's a great way of looking at it. This is just another external parking contractor. They happen to have ownership in it, but it is another external parking contractor. You have convinced me.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 1:01:32
“Well, I think at the heart of it, it's a services agreement. And that is that El Roblar will provide the service of parking spaces, okay, to it. And I would actually limit the scope, like this is a one pager service. to me that you're going to deliver you know lucas and the city could probably guide you on this question of the exact number and you know the different things about the different lots here and and what happens to the little house with a couple of parking spaces and so on but to me this is a one a one pager and you know maybe maybe the you know if you guys don't want to go hard…”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 1:02:23
“I just think it's a service level agreement. It's boilerplate. Any attorney's going to have this sitting in their file somewhere that's an SLA, and it's pretty boilerplate, and then it identifies the service you're providing, which is 82 spots. And you're done.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 1:03:27
“Well, again, we have an attorney here, so I don't want to go too far, but to me it can be radically simple. You're providing the service of parking spaces, 82 spaces, everything else is irrelevant, because when those two parties, if for any reason they were no longer existing, those two parties, the contract would be void. So there's some boilerplate termination language or something like that.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 1:04:26
“Jeremy, those aren't, those aren't called to question here, just a parking. So there may be a bunch of other stuff you do. This is just a parking question to me.”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 1:09:11
“Yeah, this goes back to my question so we have already approved So do we need a new motion here to add a parking agreement between the two I”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026
- Play at 1:10:25
“we would put something together that encompasses that the smart philosophy that yeah that's my that's my recommendation and you know just as a fellow hotelier the only closing comment and I do think if we can stay out of the motion so you you guys know this better than I do what's the average hold period for a hotel for a private equity group it's five to seven years So it's not super hypothetical. We know you guys, we know you love it. We know Eric and everybody Engage wants to build a landmark thing. Awesome, 100% for it. But the fact remains the average hold period for a hotel investment…”
Planning Commission · Aug 19, 2026