Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

It's 6 o'clock, and I'm calling the Planning Commission meeting of September 2nd, 2026 to order. Could we have a roll call, please? Chair Murphy? Here. Vice Chair Chesley?

Here.

Commissioner Reich-Schmidt? Here. Commissioner Hanson?

Here.

Commissioner Stewart absent. Thank you. Could we have the Pledge of Allegiance led by Jonathan?

To the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Is there anyone here wishing to address the public communications portion of the meeting? That would be communications that are not agendized. I have no cards. Is there anyone online, Sherry? No. Okay. We will close public communications and move to the consent calendar. We have the minutes of the Planning Commission of August 19th. Are there any changes or problems with that agenda? OK. In that case, the minutes will be approved as distributed. Disclosure of site visits and ex parte contacts.

I visited both sites that we were discussing today, but that's just briefly today.

No expert? No.

Okay. No conversations. I previously visited the Flowers Amongst the Cottages, but have not visited the other sites.

Okay. no ex parte and did not visit the sites okay I have visited the site of the cottages among the flowers previously drove by it today and I have driven by the other site we'll be looking at the Planning Commission is going to be reviewing the approved phasing plan and consider an adjustment to the cottages among the flowers could we have the staff report on that please hold on i have to recuse myself i live within 500 feet of the project thank you

Good evening my name is Lucas Seibert I'm the community development director here for the City of Ojai the item you have before you tonight is a review of the progress report for the cottages among the flowers and more specifically the consideration of phase 4 construction concurrent with phase 2 And this might sound familiar because this actually was a project that came before this body basically almost a year ago to the day where this body considered this matter. I would say during that meeting and knowing that we have a new commissioner, I probably should walk through the project, the phasing, a little bit of the history. I think all that information is provided within the staff report. Just going to give kind of an overview of it. I like to do something called setting the table for the discussion. then as a public hearing we do need to open this up for public discussion as you to allow for the community to speak and then you can close that public hearing and then deliberate so Let's start with the staff report and just kind of an overview. Up on the screen here is the four phases to the cottages. So the cottages was a project that was approved by city council in 2007. And then the phasing aspects to this project was approved by planning commission, this body, in 2009. There were conditions in both instances that are together a part of the project. There was conditions for the construction of the project and then there was conditions for the phasing of the project. Within the phasing of the project was a condition number 27 that specifically identified prior to consideration of phase four. I'm paraphrasing this. It's to come before this body and scheduled as a public hearing. So we are following that condition for consideration tonight. the screen are the four phases the first phase is the phase that was recently completed and is identified within the yellow highlighted area and if I can take my cursor and kind of show you there's two buildings that were a part of this phase and then as a part of the settlement agreement There are two ADU-style building or units that are on top of this five-car garage that you're seeing here. So the yellow is the highlighted for phase one. The green is the highlighted area for phase two, which has and is currently under construction right now. So that area is here. Phase three, which has not started yet, and it's not started yet because it requires phase two to be in full completion, is highlighted in blue. And then the area that you're seeing here in red is phase four. Now phase four is the one that's up for consideration in discussion tonight. Phase one included four units. Phase two includes three units for renovation. Three also includes three units, and then four includes two units. So what this body is up for discussion tonight is taking phase two, which is in the green, and having that go concurrent with phase four. In 2025, when this first came forward as a discussion item, and I believe it was in September of 2025, The ask was basically the same with a slight caveat. They had initially looked at doing access for utilities along Aliso. After this body considered the matter and approved it, they realized that in doing so, There was no way that they could connect utilities to Aliso, that the only way that the utilities could be connected would be along and through Oak Street. So once they realized that, that would cut directly through phase three, which was a non-starter. So essentially they had abandoned that approval, recognizing that that would require an additional review by this body and potentially other changes for consideration. So that was withdrawn but interesting enough there was also appeal that was filed around that same time and the appeal was dismissed challenging the phase four piece to that puzzle. So tonight for consideration is looking at taking phase four and basically having that run concurrent with phase two. So that's pretty much it. I should mention the settlement agreement. So the settlement agreement was a part of a bigger project. This is one piece to a four piece, basically four slices to the pie. Those other projects, one in particular is just north of here as a part of that settlement agreement, which is Mallory Way. There's a project off of Montgomery that was included in that settlement agreement, as well as one on East Ohio Avenue. Those are not for discussion. That was put in this report so that you as the body were aware of that settlement agreement as it exists. With that, if the Commission has any questions, I could certainly answer them.

So the phasing plan, which was agreed to by the Planning Commission in 2008. Correct. Was the result of the settlement, like part of the settlement was coming up with a phasing plan?

So the settlement agreement came forward in 2023.

So this project has been going on for- So the phasing plan was just part of the original project approval?

Correct, so there was the approval by city council in 2007, and then the phasing plan, which was approved by this body in 2009. And then a long period before we ended up getting into a settlement agreement, essentially. There was a legal battle that was going on as well, off and on.

The settlement didn't touch any of the phasing that had been pre-approved?

No, it was basically saying to carry out the projects that had been identified. Cottages, Mallory Way, South Montgomery, East Ojai.

Would you explain to us, or perhaps you would like Mr. Becker to explain to us, the need to make this change?

If I could have Jeff or Vim come up and speak to the ask.

Good afternoon, planning commissioners and city staff. There's a couple of reasons why we'd like to move forward with it. One is that the system that we're using for these two units, the Samara units, it has an interesting ground frame system, which is the foundation system. It's a pin foundation system. which has not been done here locally and frankly we haven't done it. It's been permitted and submitted to the state and it's been permitted by the city already. So one of the main reasons we want to do it is to actually install and try the system out for these two units because the fourth project which Lucas mentioned Mallory Way has 20 plus of these units that's going to be installed and we're not quite sure how this is going to work with our Ojai land given the rocky terrain so that's one of the main reasons the second issue is that we have two of the Samara units are completed most people haven't seen those locally we'd like to install and drop those on the units and give everybody an example of what the larger project will end up looking like because that will be in front of the council in a you know at some point in the next six months the third thing Lucas if you can bring the map up of the site So the kind of the pink shaded area there, this was on the original approvals with a very large duplex. that pink shaded area is a fire lane part of phase two requires that we complete the fire lane by the fire department so those are pavers that's a whole paving system so it doesn't make any construction sense for us to go in finish the fire lane with phase two which is these three units here

And then rip it up.

So we've already sleeved underneath the improvements, the common improvements that we did over the last 18 months. So we can do that top end, but to put in the rest of the system in the parking and then rip it up, which is ultimately what we'd have to do. So that's a that's another issue And our plan our ask is that we stub in the utilities underneath these units But we're not going to hook these things up until we're done with phase three Because all the utilities that are coming in are coming in off the east side of the property through the middle of phase three You know, we have to trench through there. So some of that trenching will be occurring for phase two and but we won't be completing that until we get to phase three. So those are the basic reasons.

You're trenching for phase three and two at the same time?

no two for two for phase two yeah all the water one of the reasons we stopped previously after we got approval about a year ago was that our original approvals and discussions with the water district casitas was going to have the water systems for phase four off of aliso they was going to go along that right that area and I'm not sure if you I sent that scan of the utility I sent it to Sherry that wasn't included in there okay anyway there's a utility map but originally we thought that the utilities were going to come off of off of Aliso and unfortunately the engineers wouldn't approve that because there's issues with that line. There's too many T's off of it in that area. So the water lines will all come off of the end of Oak over here on this side, on the phase three side.

Have residents moved into phase one?

Yeah, the first two. First two. We're just starting with the two ADUs at present.

And do you anticipate filling phase two with residents before starting phase three? probably or it'll be in conjunction with that yeah dust seems to be a very large issue for the residents in that area um are you able to do anything beyond wetting the ground down to keep that from driving everybody crazy

well it is a construction site and we are doing our watering a couple times a day it's tough especially at this point you know we've had a crazy hot summer so it is a tricky deal most of the heavy grading and all that has been done and that's one of the other reasons why we went to the Samara units not only for this site but also for the larger units because those can be installed without all the kind of crazy grading that you normally would have to do besides the fact that they're built offside so you have the you know less noise you know you don't have the pneumatic hammers all the things that come along with construction

Could you explain a little bit more about what the foundation is? You mentioned a pin foundation, but I don't know what that is.

Yeah, it's called a ground frame system. So it's like large pins that are driven in to the ground, different sizes, depending on the size of the unit. And so these are drilled into the ground at different angles. And then they are tied together above ground with a metal pan system. And then your unit sits on top of it.

What's the reason for going in at angles?

Is that earthquake? Yeah, engineering, earthquake, engineering.

Do you have any questions for Jeff?

You covered initially, yes. Thank you.

See, you were mentioning how for phase two, this red line from

Is that the water course or is that a road you were saying that kind of starts on Aliso and then?

Yeah, that's the road, the kind of the pink area. And then the storm channel is kind of to the east of that, just up against it.

So can you clarify that? Because the diagram looks like it's a part of phase four, I guess, but you were saying it's a part of phase two.

oh the fire yeah the fire department has required that that be completed before phase two units are occupied all the way to the end or just at the end of phase two uh they've all the way to the end where the turnaround is i don't know if you can see it on your map here there's a deadhead there for fire uh-huh yeah

and i guess if we had the utility plan we'd see where those lines were coming through there is that the is that the deal um i have some hard copies thank you

I've got staff making copies of these so that the community can see this as well The utilities in general at the site you know that's reliving the utilities of the 30s and the electrical feeds were also feeding some of the neighbors overhead so those are all being put underground phase one is already all underground but the rest of the phases obviously will all be underground how will you be bringing or from where are you bringing the um samara units in is that going to be on the so that's another on that road from aliso That's a great question because that's another one of the reasons why we want to do it. These things are installed with a massive crane and so they're lifted up and so we've had their crane operators that are used to dealing with Samara units and it'll probably come in off the vacant lot side to the north off of Mallory Way. It can stretch you know 100 I think it's 140 feet but that's where they'll be coming in and dropping in So it really won't impact the cottages among the flowers No there's not enough you couldn't get a crane in there at this point

I have a question about the Samara units. The external finishing of them will be similar to the other, the older style cabins?

Yeah, on these two units, it's a cement fiber siding, but yeah, it's a wood siding appearance, but they meet all the state fire codes, all that.

Okay, but they blend in with the other.

Yeah.

I had the opportunity to go and view the Samaria units last year when we were looking at this. And they were really very nice. Great.

Cool.

So any other questions for Jeff? Not at this time?

Not yet. OK. Thank you, Jeff. Thanks. Thank you.

At this point, I will open the public hearing. And I have a card from Anita Cram.

Good evening. So I have a couple of comments from the beginning. First is that pavers do not need to be put down for a fire truck to get down that road. There's fire truck access on it currently. Second is drilling into the ground is going to be no less intrusive than what they're doing now to phase two. So this is going to be a tremendous burden on the people living in the neighborhood, not just those at the cottages. People are already at breaking point from all of the noise, the trucks, the disruptions. And that's why the phasing was set a long time ago, was to keep in mind of the impact that this was going to have on the neighborhood. So... These cottages, in the conditions of approval, it says that a professional historian is one who has to make the decisions about, it's in the conditions of approval for the cottages among the flower, that they are the ones who have to make the decisions about whether or not anything that's done at the cottages matches them historically. Because remember, these cottages are eligible for federal, state, and local historic landmark status. Due to the loss of that, there are mitigations, and one of them is that a professional historian must be involved in making decisions. That professional historian is the only one who can decide if these Samari units are comparable to the history of the cottages. In addition, the settlement agreement This is being proposed to use as a test for Mallory Way. But Mallory Way, as the developer said, is project number four in the scope of all four of them. So there's plenty of time between... There's no need to rush phases to have that particular... you know model sitting there for a while before they actually get to even being able to do it at mallory way and in addition the settlement agreement that lucas mentioned of 2023 is has specific language about the interior of the mallory way bungalows so the approval of cottage of these samara units at mallory way was illegal in the context of the settlement agreement, because that's a binding agreement. And the only people who can change that are the signatories. And the planning commission nor the development director are a signatory to that agreement. So that is a big problem for the city, that they broke the conditions of approval. I'm sorry, they broke the settlement agreement when this body approved Samara units for Mallory Way. They're not a signatory. They can't do that. And the language is very specific. I sent it in as part of my comments. The language is very specific in the settlement agreement about Mallory Way and what can and cannot be done in those units. So all of those are moot. All of those approvals of Samara units. And the development director should have never approved by decree that he could make a significant change from ground built up, you know, homes for cottages among the flowers to these Samara units. Because again, the conditions of approval, this is a CEQA mitigated negative declaration. It is required due to the loss of historic resources that these things be considered. So there's a lot of problems with this. And I think you're putting the city and everyone in jeopardy by moving forward when all of this has been broken. In the process and the way this is gone and the neighborhood really needs consideration on you guys just deciding to do these two Units concurrently it they won't be happy Thank You Anita Is there anyone else in the audience who wishes to speak to this issue

Have you filled out a card, sir? I would. Is there anyone online? No. OK. Then we'll wait for this gentleman. Thank you, sir. Ellen, what is your last name?

According to this documentation, it would be Melhoff, M-E-H-L-H-A-F-F.

Thank you.

I have several names and aliases. Thank you. So the only question that I have about the proposed four stages is I'm a little confused on the pictures. The pictures only are showing, it looks like construction diagrams are not giving me an interpretive feel of the the area and the different things like it doesn't show windows it doesn't show that the bushes it doesn't show termite infestation or bugs cockroaches dirt debris leaves any of that other stuff thank you for having me speak thank you Alan okay I see no other people wishing to speak so I am going to close the public hearing and bring the discussion back to the Commission

Do you have any questions at this point?

Lucas, can you respond to some of the items that were brought up in the- About the historian? Anita's comments, both about the history, the unit choice and approval. I think those are the main ones.

So if you're looking at the, so there's a couple things that I'm not necessarily in line with in terms of what she's identifying and then these were also brought up in 2025 so because of the multiple questions and comments that were provided by the community we put together an FAQ that FAQ is attached to this I don't know if you remember but at the end of that meeting when you made a determination I had made the promise that I would put together an FAQ So that is included in here as well to kind of help inform the review and process overall. Speaking specifically to, like for instance, the settlement agreement from 2023, that really, it has a lot of different pieces to the puzzle of that four pieces of property. throughout the city as a part of the settlement agreement and working with Becker, obviously approved by city council. The conditions of approval specifically, if you look at those, you see the conditions of approval from 2007 that specifically identify and were approved by city council. Then you also see the conditions of approval that were a part of the phasing plan, which requires the triggering of review by this body if Phase 4 is being considered. It also has language in there that speaks to the completion of Phase 3. Well, here, Phase 3 isn't even being considered simply because we are still working on or the developer is still working on Phase 2. In terms of process and procedure, the reason why it's before you is that specific condition, condition 27, calls for this body to review and consider the progress report and then phase four. So because phase four is being leapfrogged, it's before this body for consideration. that's the first piece the second piece is the historian piece there is a specific condition she is correct through the mitigation that was a part of this project there is the requirement for historian the it's my understanding that the developer has a contracted historian that is in constant review i know we have in-house a conditions of approval compliance officer that is out there regularly monitoring and making sure that the conditions of approval for the entire project, including both the phasing conditions as well as the conditions that were approved by city council in 2007, are adhered to. So, yes, all of those pieces are in play.

I understand that Mallory Way is landmarked.

Hold on, hold on.

Is there anything similar for cottages?

Mallory Way is not landmarked.

25 units or something like that are?

It's being considered for landmarking, yes. This body, as well as the Historic Preservation Commission, had reviewed Mallory Way and then forwarded their recommendations to city council. So right now, it's sitting and waiting for review by city council.

OK. Is there anything similar going on at the cottages? In terms of historical landmarking, review, is there any consideration?

Yeah, the site is not landmark, does not contain a Mills Act. But through the M&D that was prepared for this project and certified in 2007 by city council, it does identify a number of conditions as mitigation to not moving forward with a landmark, ultimately.

And have those mitigations all been met?

Yeah, they're working on those mitigations as we go along. Now, I would have to check in with the compliance officer to see what the progress report is on those. I know he's working on that kind of independently.

Jeff, do you have anything to add at this point?

Yeah, we have a plethora of consultants that are involved. So we have Rincon consultants and their historian as part of the project. We just had them out there last week in 105 degree weather reviewing phase two, including all of our work that's going to be involved in phase two. All of you guys are happy to go take a look at it. It's they're sitting on stilts Two of the phase two of those units that are in phase two. So yes, we do have a consultant the city's Code compliance officer Eduardo is out there Probably twice a week Just doing his site visits, so okay.

Thank you. Thank you. I

The implication was also that there is some relation to the historian and the approval of the Samara units. So can you maybe give us a little more clarity on that?

So the Samara units were approved as a part of a director's exemption. So let me just walk you through what that process looks like. So the director's exemption provides for projects that don't warrant planning commission or city council review to be done at staff level The interesting thing about how these directors exemptions operate is notification is provided to the Planning Commission as well as City Council as required by Essentially a policy that was adopted in 2019 and So the Samara units are smaller in size than the two units that you're seeing up there for phase four. They're in the 500 to 700 square foot range. And the reduction of those saves a number of trees on site. So we saw them as being smaller, consistent with the overall development for the cottages. And then the fact that they were saving a number of trees that were on site. Obviously the trees have grown over the last 15, 18 years. So those trees that may not have been considered to be mature now qualify as mature protected trees. The historian piece, I'd have to look at that condition again, but I know we have, well not we, but the developer has a historian under contract on-site doing regular check-ins. I'm not sure how regular those are,

Do they prepare reports and submit them to the city, or is there a process?

Yeah, I haven't had them preparing reports, but I do know they're making direct contact with Eduardo and our co-consignors. I see, okay.

I was curious to what extent the state, the bills, I think it's 35 and 330. had to do with the development? Because it looks like that bill really puts a lot of pressure for more housing units.

You're talking about SB 330 and SB 35, which are basically ministerial review processes as it relates to affordable housing. And just basically multi-family development. And that's not involved? No, neither one of those applications are applicable here.

i'd like to ask an unrelated question but it came to my attention in attachment f page three of eight this is regarding the existing drainage ditch or small river however you want to look at it And it indicates that there should be a report to be done for this. What is the status of applying for the lake and stream bed alteration program? And to the Fish and Wildlife, a separate application, is that Has that been completed? Are we clear on the protection of that drainage ditch?

Yes, Judy, we have another consultant, Pax Environmental, that is working with Fish and Game on a, we have an application already, but they're working on a mitigation review, I guess I'd call it, for lack of a better word. So, in fact, I just got a copy of it yesterday, the draft. So they're reviewing it with the landscape architect for the project, which is Bill Mellick. what kind of mitigation would that be it's basically I would say they're summarizing what we have done already but they also which is the planting of local wildflower seeds but they're also looking at the Mallory Wayside because of all the eucalyptus. And so with that project, that kind of grove of eucalyptus will be removed. Some of those will be, or most of them will be removed because they're invasive. At least that's what the report is recommending.

If a grove of eucalyptus is removed, how does that change the amount of water in the channel, the ditch?

I have no idea. It's way above my pay grade. So I'm not sure.

Will that be taken into account then in this final?

Yeah, that's part of their whole report.

And does that report come to the city?

Yeah, the city would be getting a copy of it. Yeah. Okay. Yeah.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

While you're up there, Jeff, I was hoping because obviously some of the concerns are about the intensity of work on the site. It's a main concern, it seems like. And so I was hoping, you know, you're talking a little bit about what's happening with phase two right now, which is that the buildings are lifted. There's excavation happening for the foundations. All three are lifted. Two are lifted.

Two of the three are lifted. The excavation's already done.

Excavation's done.

Yeah, those were done by hand, too. By hand.

Yeah, primarily by hand. Is the third one also need foundation, new foundations?

Yeah, there's a resident in that unit. So ultimately, when we get to that, that'll be the same thing, but...

I see.

Yeah, the trenching and all that stuff will occur at some point once that resident has to relocate.

So basically you're moving into maybe forming and pouring foundations on those buildings? Right. guess if this were well no so then and then if this were to get approved what would sort of be can you kind of take us through the scope of work for for the phase four zone just to understand what's kind of happening concurrently on these on these two areas

with this system it's the the screws are basically screws so just imagine a giant screw these are drilled in with a pneumatic gun system so you don't have the kind of the crazy lifting of dirt yeah that would occur so just by the nature of this design it's actually less less of a intrusive sort of install that you would have with you know trenching down three to four feet There's some tree removal though that's first there's some tree removal yeah yeah one of the larger trees fell down last year unfortunately but yeah there's some tree removal still yeah but it's a total different animal than that was originally approved back in 2007 we actually acquired this in 2014 just so you guys know So one of the reasons we went with these units is, as Lucas noted, was the size. It's much more in keeping with what we have there with the units versus this massive duplex, which basically was lot to lot.

Roughly how long does it take to put in the foundation for the Samaras?

How many? Well, the ground frame group told us two days. So that's a whole different animal than what we're used to experiencing. That's one of the main reasons why I'm in front of you So we want to try it out and see how it works and see if it's if it's viable I mean, so I've seen it in person At another location, but you know, that's a different Soil condition, so we want to see how it does here And the Samara units would just be dropped in so these are two units.

Those would be actually in one day So is there any? So the trees need to be removed. Is there any other site grading that needs to happen before the pins go in?

Most of it's actually already been done in that area. This is up against kind of where we have a sort of a temporary walkthrough. So there'll be a little bit of removal, scrub, and other things, but it won't be the typical thing that you come in and have to do a lot of grading. We're not going to be doing that.

I like the idea of getting the landscaping started earlier with this proposal Well they're still going to have a lot of site work to do around it after this they're just going to kind of be sitting there waiting No the landscaping was going to start They won't be occupied you know they'll just be sitting there basically sort of like the unit that was in the parking lot

Well then maybe in response to Judy's comment is a question is does it stop once the Samara phase forward does that work stop once the Samara units are dropped or is there other work that would then continue to happen before the utility trenching?

I think I read that you're going to do the landscaping.

Some of the landscaping we want to do to tie in the path So, but that's actually, a lot of that is part of phase two. So, you know, there's a whole path improvement that even gets done to the phase one. Right now, it's just the existing one that was in place, which has a gravel set up.

Where's the path? It's the one, it's above the road?

Yeah, you can kind of see this line here comes in here.

Oh, this path, yeah, yeah, yeah, okay, okay, okay. Okay and then right so then they're basically at that point theoretically they're sitting there on site waiting for the utility work to start once phase three begins which is six months out a year out Probably a year out maybe a little bit longer I guess then a couple of questions. What if, as you said, theoretically these pinned foundations should kind of go in pretty quickly. Yes. But you also don't know for sure. you know what kind of what's the what's the is there like what's kind of the the backup or the you know because if we're sitting here like oh it's gonna be two days and then you know it's like three months four months for whatever reason probably not but like i think that could be a concern the one i looked at they did in a day yeah so uh that was santa barbara county so did they have rocky soil

I don't think it was as rocky as our soil, but yeah, they did have some rocks.

What do you do when you hit a rock with this group?

They shorten those rods, so you basically can work around rocks. If they run into one, they shorten it.

They actually put another one in somewhere else.

Different size, a different length. So it's a pretty interesting system.

But you haven't done any, there hasn't been like a test pit done or something to see sort of what's, what might be generally there?

Yeah, I mean, they have our souls report, and they came down, and they're going to come down, assuming we get it set up.

So the water will be, is going in, in phase three, will be connected up? Will that mean that the phase two buildings will have water? Will they have water after phase three is finished, or how does that work?

They'll have water as they're finished. Oh, they'll get it? Yeah, phase two will have water.

Okay, so it'll be connected that far? Yeah.

Then when it goes across the ditch to phase four, that's the... Yeah, we'll tie in phase four when phase three is completed, as that's being completed. Okay.

What else is left to do in phase four? If we approve putting the Samara units in concurrent with phase two, is there anything left to do in phase four other than to connect the utilities?

That's really it. And you know, maybe some additional cleanup on the trail because there's public improvements on that trail You know that becomes a public right-of-way So public works will get their say on that So the yeah just kind of putting in another way I guess so that the trenching that work is

That does have to happen now because you want to be able to cover it with the fire road.

Our plan is only to stub it to the outside edge, a little bit past the outside edge of the units, the two Samara units, and then it'll just sit there. We already have the feed stubbed over the area that will be the fire road.

Turn around.

Those are already stubbed because we put in a whole channel system there and a whole concrete bed there that has a couple feet of dirt on top of it.

So those already those stubs are already there now.

So these blue magenta lines are already running under where and orange already running under where the fire roads going to going to go.

Yeah they're stubbed there so you've got those already in the ground some portions of them they're just not you know they're not tied into Oak Street because that's a much longer run they're just under that I see there's like a section underneath the road yeah yeah we get connected to another side exactly yeah okay yeah we have you know a new sewer line stubbed underneath there electrical gas and the Edison and we have temp we have current temp for the sewer line that goes across the phase two because that all gets cleaned up as well This is 1930s where people just put stuff in the ground and it's all vintage. It's all very old.

Do you have approval already to pull all these lines from Oak Street?

yeah yeah we've already gone through that process we just wrapped up with Edison Casitas has been done for quite a while as well as Ojai Valley Sanitation along with all of their fees which are substantial do we have further questions

So then the real, the real, okay, so the pipes are kind of already there, so it doesn't really have anything to do with the fire road, because I guess, yeah, it doesn't really have anything to do with the fire road.

The fire road is really related to phase two.

Yeah, it's happening in phase two, but the work that's going to go underneath it is already done anyways.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, at least the utility lines are. We have those in place. Sure, right. Yeah, we have those in place.

So then really the reason is mostly just to test it out and do a display. That seems like the main goal.

That is the main driver.

Which, if it can happen in a couple of weeks, seems like not a big deal.

But if it's... Oh, as far as the foundation being installed?

Yeah, that whole process. I mean, the units are ready, basically.

Yeah, the units are wrapping up the middle of the month, this month. Yeah. So, yeah.

So theoretically, this whole thing is actually phase four would be almost, I mean, a large chunk of that would be finished before phase two is even like halfway kind of done, potentially.

Well, we still have to schedule everything. So that, you know, we haven't done any of that. Right. So, you know, we're probably a couple months out getting it organized.

Yeah.

Getting the units, because they have to come up from the factory. That's where they're at now. And then the crane system, all that, and the foundation system. So there is work to be done.

Work on your end, not so much work on the site.

I mean, some work on the site. Just organizing it all.

So the crane system comes in on the street behind the two units, right? Yes. Is there over pretty clear access?

Yeah. Yeah, if you walk that site, we have our... On that side we have You know, we have kind of a construction section. That's all fenced off Becoming in that that area if you've been over there, you can take a look at it. It's fenced off.

Okay Thank you Jeff, thank you the public hearing was closed earlier Anita It's We we asked there was no one online I So, point of order.

You could reopen the public hearing, but if you do that, you've got to open it up for everybody to comment.

For everybody. I did that once. It was a mistake.

Might I identify that given the context of what we're talking about I would recommend that you just open it up for the public for time Okay the rest of you will stay seated right It provides the opportunity so if you are commenting you do need to fill out a speaker's card Well this person is online Okay Sherry could you

Locate that person online, and I will reopen the public hearing at this point.

She's on. Thank you very much. I very much appreciate it. This is Teal Row, Ventura County. Commissioner Murphy, I really appreciate you bringing up the watershed because that's always been my concern with this entire project and the map that's on Probably you're looking at it. I'm not looking at it now, but the map of the project just for the record I want to make a record that that's a wind River and a watershed that's been feeding Ojai and for history. The other thing is that what I hear is, and I was online and I did raise my hand. And Sherry, I heard you say that there was no one online when I was online. I just want everybody to know that for the record. And what I hear since then, which I probably wouldn't have said then, is what I hear is you're getting walked through a project. And I'd like to remind you all, and I do appreciate your service. I know you're sitting up there as a service to the town. It's a beautiful thing that you're offering. That this project is based on an agreement that was made. And I think Anita Cram actually mentioned some of the things in that. I missed it because I came in a little bit right when she was talking. And I'd like to remind everybody, and I'd like it for the public record, and I do not want this to be erased in any way, that that agreement that was negotiated for this project that I hear the Planning Commission being walked through at this moment, being led by the planner, is based on 600 Ojai signatures. that were a referendum that were against this project in the very beginning. So this project and this decision is I'm asking to stick to the phases which were agreed upon, which are based upon public interests, public caring, hearts in Ojai that signed the referendum that were against this project. And I ask that you stick to the phases. I ask that you do not, whatever you're doing tonight, stick to the phasing as it's written in the agreement. And There's not a project being walked through without the agreement. That agreement is based on the people of Ojai. And I thank you very much for your service.

Thank you, Teal. At this point, I'm closing the public hearing. Lucas. The directions, our job tonight is to review the approved phasing plan, which obviously we have been doing. Proving the change in phasing require a resolution? I didn't see one in here, and so I'm wondering what that process is.

I think the cleanest way, if you are, so there's a couple of, just back up here for a second. So you are reviewing as a part of that condition of approval the phasing plan because there's an interest in concurrently working through the phase two and the phase three at the same time. So that's where we're at tonight. And based on the information you've heard tonight, that's really kind of what you're looking to draw conclusions from. But in addition to that, you've also heard from the community virtually as well as in writing and in person. You as a body are charged with reviewing it and then considering it. Now you have a couple of different options. You can review and consider and move forward with the phase four, concurrent with phase two. You can, which I would recommend if you're doing that, that it also be done by resolution. Similar to what we did with a project recently where there was a determination made and then we brought forward a resolution for clarity in terms of the action, right? There are other options that you should also be aware of, which is that you do not have to consider this, that you can deny the phase four approach and then have them move forward as the phasing plan identifies. That is an option that you have. You've considered the information and you've chosen not to move forward in phase four and move forward as the phasing plan identifies. You have that option as well. If you make that determination tonight, I would also recommend that you direct staff to prepare a resolution to come forward at the next meeting.

We would need a resolution with either option? Yes.

I think in either sense, you probably do need a resolution.

So we're just going to direct you to prepare a resolution depending on what we decide?

Correct.

Okay. Thank you.

I guess the other option would be that you take no action and that you just basically effectively denying the request at the same time. But just identify that you've reviewed as a part of the condition but are not, I guess it wouldn't necessarily be a no action, it would be a denial essentially at the same time. So I retract that statement. It would be one of these two options that you're looking at.

If I may just to add to that the condition 27 that we're looking at and I agree with how Lucas laid that out says prior to the commencement of phase 4 the Planning Commission shall have the opportunity to review the progress so as you're describing if there's no action taken that condition remains in place and that opportunity comes down the road at the end of phase 3

Okay.

Does anyone care to tell us what you think of this?

I mean, I'm a little torn, I guess. I think that on the one side, I think what's a little hard to know is how for us to know what will happen. I think as rightly has been pointed out, the phasing was set up to kind of stage things for the public interest, for people living around it to reduce the intensity or hold the intensity of action on the site to a certain level. And

it was also intended to help give the current residents time to move within the projects yeah so that makes sense too

well yeah so i mean this this doesn't really impact that element because there's nobody living there and there won't be anyone living there No, I mean in the units. Judy's comment was about how the phasing was established around the ability for people in the units to also be there for longer periods of time, if that's accurate. So phase four, there are no units there currently. is no one living in those units so it doesn't really play a role in this the intensity of work does i think and i just think it's hard to know what on the one hand these units seem like that should be pretty straightforward and maybe it's really simple but trees still have to come down there's still some site grading that has to happen

The number of trees that are being removed is significantly reduced, but there will be trees removed still, yeah. Okay. But that was already a part of it.

Fewer trees, but yes, okay.

Yeah, I mean, I think that's the point, right? It's like, okay, there's less of something. The foundation system is far easier than digging a hole, forming it, pouring concrete, or putting the rebar and pouring concrete. It's still work though, so I think that's why it's not exactly. clear to me 100% what I'm yet to be convinced that we should just say yeah let's do it Do you feel like convincing him?

Well I mean I think you know with the phasing part of it I think it's a good point that These are new units that are not occupied. The other piece is that while there might be concurrent work done, it's not nearly to the intensity of Phase 2. It's dramatically different, and a lot of the grading and the site and so forth has been done, which costs a lot of that issue, I think. The other piece around it is that if it's done, the project will be done sooner. And, you know, I think there's something to be said for that, that it'll be done sooner and then it'll be normality or whatever that would be that would return sooner than two.

It's an interesting point, something I was kind of thinking about, but for some, I mean, and I don't know why, but for some reason the community has not noted that. That doesn't seem to be maybe as much of a value to them. And I'm not sure why. I guess we didn't. you know but for some reason because i thought that too it's like this is a this system that they're looking to use is you know it's an efficient system no matter what it's going to happen at one time or another yeah and by moving it forward you are increasing the intensity of the action for probably a few days to a couple weeks

but it does get the whole thing done sooner, which I would imagine would be a huge benefit to the community as well.

Yeah, I can see that too.

Yeah. But I think one of the pieces, with that, I think getting and structuring the road construction and so forth and getting those pieces done, I would take that on face value, that that would be something that would help to help the construction so you don't have to redo the work of laying out that fire.

And it allows him to put residents into phase two

sooner more quickly and i think it just may it speeds up the process so the phasing seems to make sense you know to end that it should overall the uh it's a trying time i mean you know when you go through a project like this i think for the residents and to acknowledge that's a that's a lot but uh at the same time i think if we can um uh quicken the process and get it go smoother that would should be to the benefit of they all the original phasing plan

did not take into account the surprises that were going to come along. For example, the movement of the utilities from Aliso to Oak Street. So I think you have to be flexible and try to

get things done efficiently and that does seem to me that this refacing would do So if we directed you to prepare whatever resolution we've directed you to prepare basically then we would still have time you know we'd still come back and vote on that resolution next time Or just sign it if we direct what the resolution

You can take an action and then direct a resolution to be brought forward for, so basically you would be then approving the verbiage that is provided within the resolution. Just as you do with a draft resolution that's a part of the packet.

If we approve it tonight, does that give the Becker group the opportunity or the ability to go forward with planning?

I would say that I would have them hold off until you take official action on it at the next meeting with the resolution. Either way, in terms of how you operate. Yeah.

OK. I think the chair is ready to hear a motion.

I would make a motion that we request a resolution to vote on in allowing the program or the phasing to move ahead on this project concurrently with phase two and four

Is there a second? I will second that motion. Any further discussion of it?

Yeah, I mean, I think what I would just say is I think, you know, I would kind of encourage the community to think about the discussion we had tonight. I mean, we have obviously Some opinions, some questions still. I think if they could find a way to respond to some of the things that maybe we're not 100% on, that would be a useful thing between now and the next meeting when we were to vote on this resolution.

Could you give me an example?

Well, I think in particular this idea that, hey, this project might be able to be done quicker. Might that be a nice thing? And I think I'd be curious to get a response on that because to me it would be, as someone who works in this field, i think this seems does seem like a positive because you know let's say there are issues well then you're tackling those issues now and you're getting it done sooner which although i can appreciate the desire while you're in the midst of construction that you don't want it to intensify also having it done sooner it has has its has its virtue so yeah okay

OK, I think we are. Ready to call the vote, Hanson. Yes, Chesley. Yes, Murphy, yes. OK, do you need anything else from us to prepare the resolution?

I have the information that you provided in terms of the verbal and will prepare working with legal prepare resolution for your for this body to vote on.

OK. Thank you, everyone. We will now move on to item three, which is a tree permit and zone clearance.

Hold on. Let's wait for Commissioner. She's coming. Right. To be seated, yes.

She's coming.

All right.

oh my more you didn't kill enough trees Maura this is two inches thick you know okay oh thanks

I remember one like this. There's one like this, but not this one. It's similar. Okay. Okay. It's much more detailed.

Pardon?

It's much more detailed than what we've got.

Have you been by that? OK, we are ready for the staff report.

Mars pulling up her PowerPoint, but yeah, should be given the report tonight, OK?

Share screen. Thank you, Chair and Commissioners. Tonight, or for this project, it's a review and recommendation to the Community Development Director of a zone clearance and tree permit for projects located at 824 Foothill Lane. So the municipal code, Section 10 to 1903 is regarding a zone clearance application which is required to be submitted and reviewed by the director for compliance with code standards for a structure to be either erected or remodeled in conjunction with a building permit. so this is considered a non-discretionary or ministerial permit these applications are reviewed for compliance with fixed objective written standards including setbacks height density parking there's no subjective judgmental or personal discretion and pursuant to 4.1107 when five or more oak trees sycamore heritage trees these are considered protected trees are to be removed cut down or relocated on a single parcel of land the applicant is referred to the planning commission through staff for a recommendation to the director and subject to mitigation measures so the mitigation measures before I get to the mitigation measures the current proposal requires his own clearance for the development of a approximately 4,500 square foot single-family single-story residence with an attached 728 square foot two-car garage a detached ad you an in-ground pool and linear fence slash site wall the proposed construction construction meets all of the zoning standards applicable for director approval of that zone clearance if it wasn't for the removal of more than five protected trees you wouldn't be seeing this zone clearance here tonight it would be reviewed by the director so requiring Planning Commission review and recommendation is to the director is regarding the nine protected trees. And they're being requested to be removed to accommodate this new single family residence. pursuant to section 10 to 1802 of the code an applicant for a development project which requires the filing of more than one application shall file all applications concurrently and unless this is waived by the director of the permit processing is done concurrently and the final decision is subject to the highest level of review authority which in this case is the Planning Commission because as you see here up on the screen a tree permit for the removal of more than five trees is referred to the Planning Commission for recommendation to the director and the zone clearance is ministerial usually considered by the director So these permits are part of the same project, and that is why we are here this evening. So section 411.07 of the code is regarding the protected trees and states that if the protected trees are being removed for reasons of convenience personal taste or to facilitate new construction which is what is the situation here the trees are to be replaced with trees of suitable type size and number and they're generally required to be replaced with like species if you're removing an oak or a sycamore the number type and size of the replacement shall either be equivalent to the appraised value which in this case is 119,600 or the total sum of the diameter of all of the tree trunks together of the removed trees which in this case is approximately 125.4 inches if the site can't accommodate that number of trees then the dollar value of the replacement may be paid as an in lieu fee to the city's tree fund and that's at the discretion of the either director or in this case the planning commission So the applicant's tree mitigation proposal, and oh, and by the way, out in the lobby as well as in front of you tonight is an updated tree plan and information by the arborist. And I received that after the packet went out. So that's why I brought it in this evening. If you have something similar in the packet, this is slightly different and so that's why you have it. So the applicant's proposal is to replace the nine Coast Valley Oaks with nine Coast Valley Oaks. the oaks the nine that they're proposing to replace with are two at 24 inch box three 36 inch box and four 48 inch box um the replacement is approximately 31 inches in diameter with a cost of approximately 8 815 which is less than the um the value and diameter of the trees that um being removed here is a plan that shows where the trees in red are the ones that are replacing the ones that are being removed And with that, the Planning Commission is charged with, back to this slide, making a determination as to one, two, and three. the code states that the following shall apply and that's one two and three the trees being removed or to be replaced with a suitable size with like species which is what is happening the number to either be at the cost I'm sorry that the trees are either to be at the cost of the ones being removed or the diameter and they're doing kind of a portion of both that's what they're proposing and again number three is if the site can't accommodate the trees then a fee can be can be submitted if you so choose and with that we do have the arborist here and Potentially and we have an applicant That concludes my presentation, thank you then if you have any questions Yes

thank you do you have questions for the staff okay in that case we will hear from the applicants

I brought some old school plans in case anybody's curious.

Much easier than what we're looking at when you reduce it for 9 by 11.

Hello, good evening, everybody. And thanks for the opportunity for me to provide a little more clarification. And thanks, Mara, for the presentation on our client's behalf. My name is Brett Ettinger. I'm an architect, my own firm. And what I'd like to do is just walk you through a few clarification points, if I could, that may help aid in your decision making and may also help to clarify some potential issues that some folks in the crowd might have. Mara is correct we have a project that is requesting to replace the removed oaks in like in kind and in number with nine nine replaces nine the nine as Mara explained are large in size right off the bat we're able to fit four 48 inch box three 36 inch boxes and two 24 inch boxes if it's possible to bring up that tree replacement plan slash tree protection plan it would be very helpful for me but I'll keep talking in the meantime The process was a little confusing for me, so I apologize for not having everything in the planner's hand earlier. But once we were told that we were exempt from a discussionary design review, I kind of got excited, dropped the ball, and so forth. But we nonetheless have hired a really good landscape architect. Her name is Kaylee Grubb with Arcadia Studios. She was born and raised here. We do have a comprehensive landscape plan. That plan could make its way up here soon. She was able to find a proper space to enhance our existing remaining 23 oak trees. on this one acre site she was able to find a location for nine additional trees hard for me to talk without that plan but i'll try my best The trees that are being proposed to be removed, six of which are on the west side of the existing home. There it is, thanks so much. And they're labeled, they're shown in red there. I should point out that in Jan Scow's tree report, five of those six are called out in fair health condition five of those six are called out having poor structure if uh we could go to the two more sheets to the photographs i think you should have those photographs in here i don't have the photographs in my um in my powerpoint but however there are photographs in there uh in the planning commission's packet oh okay if you can happen to find those photographs trees 309 to 314, those are the six in question on the west side. They are, once you get those photographs in front of you, you'll notice they're leaning dramatically to the east or over the existing home as it exists right now. So they're over and encroaching over the roof.

So excuse me, sorry, we are looking at attachment C. I don't see the page number. It's on the last page of attachment C. It's LT3. Go ahead, Brett.

okay to go so those those six trees that are modest or smaller in size are already encroaching over the existing western edge of the home and as you may all be aware that ventura county doesn't like trees to be hanging over rooftops these days and especially if you try to get new home insurance They're actually flying drones over your house right now and telling you to chop the branches from above your tree. So those trees are planned there is to plant two additional trees at the southern edge of the existing oak tree canopy on the west side and one on the northern edge. selectively prune back what's left. This is a very dense oak woodland with no structure. It's just complete shade over there. And the idea is to resurrect or make healthy again that oak woodland on the west side while retaining privacy toward the neighbor to the west and for our clients in their home. We are also proposing for four of the replacement trees to do something that does not exist right now. And that is to add four trees to the front yard One off the left side of the existing driveway, one as you enter the motor court, one in the front yard proper, and one off the southwest corner to sort of extend and connect that existing oak roof. I think that's a wonderful thing because most of the trees, if not all of them, are in the back and only subject to the enjoyment of our client right now, but we'll be planting four new oaks out front for the enjoyment of all of Foothill Lane and the immediate neighborhood. The other three oak trees that are going to be planted, I've counted, I've told you about six so far, are three in the back, two on the northwest corner, and one adjacent to the large specimen oak tree on the right in the northeast corner. Those are to enhance the existing oak canopy in the back, provide necessary privacy for the neighbor to the north and for our clients, and to otherwise enhance and distribute the trees around the site that they otherwise aren't doing right now.

Brett are the proposed trees the ones that are in yellow on this plan They are in yellow

Yeah, OK. And then there's a really hard to see legend here that calls out the size of the . Yeah, so there's one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, and then another one on the east side to provide a to the neighbor on the east end where nothing exists right now. They're about a five foot wooden fence.

How close is the closest tree to the house?

The closest proposed tree or the closest proposed? The closest proposed tree, well, they're far away from the house. You can see they're around the perimeter of the site pretty much of this one acre site. There are some existing trees that are somewhat close to the house that we're retaining. Can you speak into the microphone?

I'm sorry.

Trying to point at the same time. I'm sorry about that. Yeah, so there are three wonderful specimen sycamore trees. I'd point, but you wouldn't be able to hear me. The big green one right there near, and that's what we've designed the house around. We've located the entry off the off the knuckle of that big statement sycamore tree, that one right there. So that dictated our design. There are two other sycamore trees on the eastern edge there of the motor court that are wonderful. There's a statement oak right there that's wonderful. I think the whole neighborhood enjoys that. And then there's some big mature oaks in the back or the northern part of the property. You can see one, two, three, four. They're big, they're mature, they're real specimen trees. of that into account why in addition to the six that I told you about are we proposing to remove what about those other three they are the three red circles up around the pool right there and they're smaller in stature but nonetheless they're important trees this is a very odd house right now, although its presence at the street is wonderful and charming. In the backyard, it's the oddest graded site I've ever seen in my 35 years of architecture. When you're in the house right now, it's all glass with sliding doors. And 10 feet to the north, it steps up about four feet, the paving and the landscape and the hardscape. So when you're in the house, you feel like you're in a pit, much to the disenjoyment of our clients so we are proposing to extend the living space north bring the grade down so that they can have an outdoor living space that's actually useful for them if that makes any sense and so as a result we're taking these four foot walls and moving back careful not to touch the bigger oak trees to establish a lower grade and then enhance their visual beauty from the house and from all around so that's why those three smaller red trees are being proposed so that totals nine but six of which i would say would probably have to go anyway if the fire department has any say so technically we're at three that we've designed the house to necessitate the removal of those three trees The house itself, just real quick, we take special care on all our projects to be super respectful of the natural environment. This house is deliberately only one story, and it's made up of several volumes, probably eight or nine volumes that are all separate and of different size to break down the massing of the house and keep it low key with lots of shadow. In between all of these volumes are low roofs with glass elements that actually form framed views of all of the landscape, specifically the oaks. We've designed these framed views of all the oaks to bring all of their beauty into the house and vice versa. We took a lot of care in designing this house so that it wasn't a big, massive two-story home. It's a low-key, very restrained house with appropriate traditional material. It's all white plaster, our own special stew of white plaster that really allows for beautiful shadows and sunlight. and is a great backdrop, a horizontal backdrop, for these beautiful vertical trees that we have on the site. So that's probably way more than you needed to know, but I wanted to give you a little reason. And I must apologize. Like I said, we didn't expect design reviews, so I didn't have a chance to do what I normally do on all of our projects when we go through public design review, and that is to meet with any of the neighbors to talk them through our design. I did not have a chance to do that, so I apologize to you. I'm available with this big set of drawings to meet any of you after to walk you through our landscape plan, our architectural plan, and our grading and drainage plan to further elaborate any things that I might not have talked about here to give you a little more information on why we've done what we've done. Thank you for your time.

Is the landscape artist who planned where to put the replacement trees here?

Yes, I have it here. They're there.

I'm asking if the person is here. The landscape architect is not here, no. Thank you. Okay, do you have any questions for him at this time?

I just have a question about the mitigation proposal Are you going to address that?

I believe Jan might be here so he will be able to answer any technical objective questions that you might have Maybe we could have him

Good evening. I'm Jan Scow. I am the arborist for the project.

So I just had questions. If you could walk us through the mitigation. So I see that your appraised value is $119,600 of the nine trees to be removed. And then that is 125 inches of trees being removed. And the replacement trees is 31.1 inches. So that leaves a total of 94.3 still to mitigate, inches to mitigate?

Yes, correct.

Okay, and then on the trees that are planted,

so so then the 94 inches what what does that represent in value okay so if you calculate this using 24 inch box trees which is fairly typical they they are they cost a specific amount if you divide that Multiply that I'm sorry multiply that times the number of inches Each one of those trees is a set diameter And so you come out with a dollar value So what would that dollar value be? It is the number on here, which is Is that the 8,000 number? Yeah eight thousand eight hundred and fifteen

So that 94 inches equates to 8,815 using 24 inch boxes?

Yes they're not all 24 inch box however you kind of rounded it rounded the dollar amount I'm gonna leave it back to Jan but yeah so we're not talking about the trees that are getting planted we're talking about

Just a mitigation value. So we're so I'm using 24 inch box oaks which cost about $205 wholesale That price varies all the time. So it may be 220 today Basically we're establishing the equivalency and stem diameter So the trees are 2.2 inches in stem diameter and a 24-inch box tree. We're dividing that into that 96-inch number to find out how many trees we would need to meet that stem diameter replacement value. And then once you've got that number, multiplying it times the dollar per tree. And that's where the $8,800 comes from. I would interject here that I don't like this system very much, but it is what it is.

Yeah, because I was just confused, because when you talk about the dollar value, it's $119,600 appraised value of the existing trees. And then you subtract what you want to put into the tree fund, which is $9,675, which leaves a total of $109,925. That's a big number. You can massage these figures any way you want to.

That's why I don't like the system you guys can decide that The applicant has to pay the appraised value you can subtract the value of the trees planted from that. That's certainly one option Frankly, I think doing that way or you're kind of punishing a little beyond what needs to be punished But that's not my call so If you take the appraised value completely away and just do a stem ratio, you know, stem size equivalency, you come up with a very certain number. If you put that stem size equivalency aside and ignore it and just do an appraisal, you come up with a very specific number. They are very different, obviously.

Right, that's what I'm noticing.

So the ordinance leads you there. You guys get to choose how you roll on this. Is that sort of clear?

It's clear to me. I just wanted you to talk me through it because I was seeing it.

It can make you crazy.

Yeah. And it is a big number. But I think for me, it's more important to have replacement trees, young ones that can establish well. in our climate and have more of the younger trees and fewer of the big box trees. Right.

I agree with that. I would also say that the money that is part of the mitigation, it would be my hope that that money would go into planting small trees around the city. that money would go into the city tree fund. So it would plant small trees. And yes, small trees are better. 48 inch box trees are not nearly as good as 24 inch box trees in my opinion. But that's, again, that's not really my call. The bigger trees look better to start with. They just, they don't excel as well in my experience.

Why are you replacing all oak with oak if indeed that kind of tree ever gets a disease or pest?

Oh, no. So personal opinion aside, the ordinance calls for like species of protected trees. The Coastal Live Oak is the most Obvious tree in Ojai. It's 95% of the oaks probably They're tough trees. They're good trees. I personally believe in replacing them with themselves I think Marm has spoke briefly and she called them coast live or Coast Valley oaks It's actually coast live oaks or what we're talking about, which is Quercus agrifolia Valley oak is the other species that we have here and that's not involved in Although we could plant valley oaks, I guess, in some of those maybe here and there. But again, not my call, really.

You're good.

It's really hard from a layperson to see all those oaks so close together and wonder if they're growing into each other and will these new ones increase that impact Okay um a couple of things first of all the new oaks are being planted or not being planted in any crowded situation The one on the south is that southwest corner on the left the front left corner uh close to oh yeah yeah It looks like it's being planted right in the middle of that grove.

It's a little bit near the other trees. And I didn't have anything to do with this, but I don't particularly object to that. But I do see your point. As far as the crowding on the west side of the property where some of those trees are being removed, That's the way they grow in nature. They all start out as acorns and they fight it out. So that's a natural woodland right there. It's normal. Over the years, some of those trees will thrive and some will not thrive. And some may end up dying ultimately. It's just competition. It's normal. It's very good habitat for whatever that's worth.

OK. Any more questions? OK. So it's our job to look at one, two, and three and tell them what we approve? Is that correct, Maura?

Tell them what actually you're making a recommendation. Yes, you're going to look at one, two, and three and make a recommendation to the director, who will then process the tree permit and zone clearance application.

Yeah. OK. We're going to open the public hearing. And I have a card from Leonard Claff.

I'm sorry. It's a discussion item. It's a discussion item, not a public hearing.

Discussion item.

Sorry discuss away whatever it is Leonard's cliff KLA if I live in the city of Ojai I am I was confused when I looked at the Proposal and and the report and I'm a little bit even more confused now My concern is on page 3 of 9 of attachment a section 2 community development department conditions to and then the III as I read III It says that in the in the future the Commission or the or the or the the director or the or the Planning Commission will decide whether to impose in lieu of fines in the event that there are not replacements and So, and it's not clear to me that the replacements that are proposed are actually part of the plan that you are requiring as a condition of your approval. If you are in fact requiring that there be nine replacement trees, then I guess it's fine, but I would ask that you decide. The concern is that in lieu of fine can be waived, which means that maybe they'll pay it in the future and maybe they won't. And maybe it'll be a public hearing at the planning commission or maybe it'll be at the desk decision by the director. That can't be. That negates the entire strength of the tree ordinance. So you either have – I would suggest you make sure that those specific trees in the specific locations are part of the approval and that you decide on a fine, or at least that there will be a fine. If those plate trees are not Replaced because otherwise it's worthless.

Thank you It just is very confusing the way it's written Thank you staff.

Would you care to address Lenny's? confusion and our confusion, so

the third one III states that if the site I think this is the one we're talking about if the site cannot accommodate the number of replacement trees the dollar but the dollar value of the replacement trees may be paid as it in lieu feed to the city's tree fund so at the discretion of my concern you stop reading that at the discretion

Of the commissioner. Right. Which means the commissioner could say no.

So what I wanted to highlight is that it does say may, not shall. So yes, it is at the discretion and what is recommended though and what is being requested is that the commission make a recommendation to the director that will be clear and so whether it's a fee or a number of trees or or both that direction is clear and yes that that may does exist but that doesn't mean that the direction won't be clear when we leave here this evening to the director Thank you And is that clear?

Yes Since the site can accommodate that number of trees I think this number is irrelevant Yes that's correct

will you remind me does the does the tree replacement does the ordinance talk about tree replacement having multiple trees like if there was one tree being removed you would have to replace with three or something like that is there anything like that in our ordinance and I think there's something like that in the county so no this is it right here

If I could, there have been occasions where you see conditions of approval that lean into that as a part of a discretionary review. So that has been conditioned in previous projects. Just not something that's earmarked within the current ordinance.

Okay.

Next person.

Yes.

The next card I have is from Larry Steingold Larry Steingold resident Lenny stole my what he said the same thing I read this and I'm going if a site cannot accommodate the number of replacement trees required the dollar value of those replacement trees may be paid as an in lieu fee right no problem at the discretion of the director of planning. So I read that as saying, ah, it can only hold four trees. We don't have to force them to have six. And we can waive the fee, everything. So we can sort of take this and make it disappear. But in my way, I'm thinking, if there's 34 inches of the boxes, why not just make them produce 125 inches of new trees? And he can plant them all over the city instead of cash. Because now we have more small trees.

Have you seen that property?

Oh yeah, no, no, not, but it has to be placed there. The idea is replacing somewhere.

In the city. Yeah, in the city. Okay, but then it goes back to instead of the small trees, you're talking about money in lieu.

Well, if nine trees are 8,000 small boxes, then we get 121 inches for 36,000 and we have more trees that can be replaced. I mean, that's the way I read it. I mean, you can do, maybe I'm wrong, I'm sure, but it just seems to me that it would be easier for them or for us. They're taking down nine crowded trees, heavy trees, that's fine. And they can replace them with money, which nobody wants to do. We want more trees. So if it's inches, then just replace 120 something inches worth of young trees.

The money goes to the tree fund, correct?

It goes to the tree fund and that buys small trees.

But enough money to generate 125 inches to replace the trees. That's what I'm saying. That's what the calculation- Okay, because I thought it was 34 inches.

No, then he calculated that there's 43 boxes would make up the remaining dimension of tree diameter, and that accounts for the $8,800, which would then purchase 43, 24 inch. All right, because this was very unclear.

Do we have a tree replacement plan in the city where exactly where we want to plant trees?

Yes. Well, by neighborhood.

It is by neighborhood and then there are specific trees within those neighborhoods through the community forest management plan yes but in terms of the number size those are all kind of at the discretion within the boundaries of the community forest management plan that the Public Works Department is guided through right so those the approved tree types to be replaced and then obviously it's also got the trees. I'm being cut off. I'm done talking. So it's an interesting way of looking at it because you do have specific types of trees for each of the kind of carved out neighborhood areas.

Yeah. So I guess my concern or my hope is that the tree fund doesn't just sit there forever and no trees being planted anywhere. So it would be nice to have a proactive, like, OK, we got 9,000 coming in. Where can we plant trees? Like, we're going to plant trees.

Yeah, and I just checked in on the balance of that tree fund, and we're about $33,000.

Yeah, what is it sitting there for? We could have trees in the ground.

It can be used for that very purpose.

What does it cost to install the trees, though? That's part of the thing, too. I was thinking buying a wholesale tree is one, but I would guess it would be more than $200 to plant a tree of that size.

I know that the arborist has spoken about that in other meetings. Do you have a dollar amount for installation?

It's like three or four times.

And does the public works, does that come out of this tree fund to pay public works for the time?

Couple of questions. The amount to install a tree.

So the typical value to actually deliver and plant the tree is equal to about the cost of the tree. If it's in a difficult location that's really hard to get to, or if it's a very large tree that takes a crane, then it might be three times the cost of the tree. But in this situation, It would be about, it would double the number, basically.

Okay, because I think in a replacement plan, it's going to be accessible to the front of the property or in the front part of the property, so it should be accessible. Right.

But it's not.

No, no, no. I meant if this money was to be used for planting in the rest of the city. Elsewhere, okay. So it would be about twice that amount. That's it.

Can I go now?

Thank you.

Don't leave the building.

You had asked the, I don't remember which commissioner had asked about the public works cost. That's already covered through the general fund. What we're looking at here is a dollar amount to purchase the trees. To purchase. Correct.

Okay. But it is additional work, right? Okay. It is additional work. I mean, you have the people, but it might be, I don't know. You've got enough to do, I think, already.

Yep. Covered under a different bucket.

OK.

Chair, are there any other comments?

Is there anyone online before we close? Two more cards came in. Is this a new one? That's a new one.

There we go. I don't think we talked to that person.

okay Alan thanks for having me speak again on the the matters at hand so I just have two comments or concerns one is the dirt and the roots that are adjacent with the oak trees or the evasive trees sometimes people say they're gonna remove a tree and place it somewhere else and then The roots are still showing. And there's a lot of removal of dirt that could be a potential problem. And then also the endangerment of animals and the removal of insects and evasive creatures that are next to the oak trees. Thank you for letting me speak.

Thank you. Michael? In Abbey? What is it? Inaba.

Yes, ma'am.

My name is Michael Inaba. I'm a local resident and another arborist. And I wanted to ask questions about a follow up on Ms. Reischmidt's question about the money. I think that's important. And also your question, Ms. Murphy, about the density of the trees. I think we're missing some really important points that add context and reason to this presentation. The number of trees is not always advantageous. A whole bunch of flammable, sick, dying trees is a fire hazard. But if we have fewer, healthier, more maintained trees, we actually have trees that resist fire. So we have to take our mind off the more trees is better mentality. And then we look at mitigation. If we have $33,000 in a fund, What we're missing mostly in the valley is the education component because trees are planted But they're not cared for and we end up with trees that can lose value or stall I can point out several on Grand Avenue that were planted over 15 years ago And they still look like they could fit in a 36 inch box They've gone nowhere. And so the benefits we think of when we're considering planting trees Those can be lost The whole effort, all of the theater, buying, moving, planting, disposing of the waste, that can be nothing. It can be lost because we're not thinking, what is this tree for? Where is it going? And so when we look at a development proposal like this, it's really important to look at the site and what it can tolerate, what the irrigation is going to mean for the growth of those trees, because if it is an oak woodland, it cannot be irrigated. If it's an oak woodland and you impose irrigation, even upslope, you're going to create overgrowth. And as the arborist described, you'll have natural attrition. And I wanted to point out one of our other, we have several double standards in our reality as arborists. One is that natural oak woodlands are fine. And if we apply that mentality to wild dogs, well, Wild packs of dogs roaming the street are fine, right? We know that that's not the case. We know that dogs in a pack have to survive. It's survival of the fittest. And when we put our landscape trees, you know, we take an oak woodland and we impose the residential standards, human safety, fire safety, all of that. we end up in a situation where we're telling the trees i just fight it out and if you fall on the house bad on you we'll clean it up and then that creates a cognitive dissonance where we're like wait a minute you can't have a tree fall on people you can't have a tree fall on cars but we're actually asking for that if we're not willing to recognize that when we have trees may i go on a little bit more okay When we have trees on a residential site, we want to manage the tree density. We want to manage the tree balance. We want to manage health, growth, longevity. Because when we manage that kind of performance, we get a longer lifespan for the tree. We get a better return on investment for our money. We end up with better trees that are actually safer for the property. That's what I wanted to say.

Thank you. Thank you, Michael. Is there anyone else?

the audience wishing to speak to this oh here we go another one Catherine I'm not very good at this but I just think it's a disservice to the community to replace the trees for a lot of the reasons that the last harvest arbutus just mentioned and and to allow all And the reasoning behind it, because the people who bought the house don't like the position of the trees is not a valid reason. And even the architect said, I think this whole decision is way immature because he said probably most of the trees the fire department would take down anyway. Why don't we get a report of that and find out if that is true? So I just wanted to say that.

Thank you, Catherine. Is there anyone online, Sherry?

Teal is online, but she does not have her hand raised.

Could we invite her to raise her hand? Maybe you can tell her how to do that, Sherry. Teal, you're back.

Thank you, Commissioner Murphy. I am online and I did not raise my hand. I do not wish to speak, but since you're offering, I will say Ohio's tree ordinance is there for a reason. Please follow it. I really appreciate Commissioner Smith's math because the way that I see it, 40 inches is well i'm just rounding way off but it's like to me it looks like a third of the inches of trees are being replaced and a tenth of the financial is being put in like the math to me does not make sense and ms schmitz first comments, I'm still wondering, but because you all know exactly what you're doing in this natural world of Oaks, I thank you for letting me speak.

Thank you, Teal. We will close the discussion and bring it back to the commission. It does feel to me like We're just sort of finding some places to stick some trees on a lot that already has big, beautiful, mature trees. I don't know if that's our decision, though.

You mean you'd rather see all of it go to a fund? Yes. That's for the...

Or at least part of, more than what's here. Putting a tree into that woodland area, there are a couple of them there that just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. So I guess.

There's some placements just to fit the nine trees on the site.

I think that's what they're doing.

Well, when I was thinking of the landscape architecture, dispersing around the perimeter, and many of them seem to be in a good location to kind of enhance the property around the perimeter.

Some of them do.

Yeah, several. There are two of them that are part of that adding.

When these two appear mature, they're going to be very close together.

Mm-hmm.

Okay She's got like almost as much grizzled experience that I have and she was very careful to place things and she sized them appropriately Understanding that she didn't want to just stuff something in there that wasn't going to be healthy in the long term So she did take a lot of care in her positioning Thank you Thank You Brett

I guess I'm okay with the nine trees where they're planted I have no problem with that I guess my my hiccup is the mitigation fee yeah so the nine is fine for planting and I think it's great that he's going with at least some 24 inch box because those are the two inch trees I am understanding So there's also a 36 inch box and a 48 yeah so I mean those are gonna be four that's fine but I'd like to see more 24 inch box I guess my issue is just the mitigation fee itself

Is there a possibility to reduce the number of trees that are being planted and increase the amount of fees in lieu? Is there a combination there? A compromise?

Well, if we read the code, again I is that they be replaced with suitable size and and type and then double I is that the number type and size shall be either the equivalent to the appraised value or the total sum of the diameter of the trunks to be replaced so there's a shall there as to that it's either now can it be a combination of those two

I'm going to interpret that that is yes but there is a total there ultimately What does the code say about does the code just say that as long as the mitigation proposal utilizes I forget the acronym. The Tree Association, whatever the ISA standards to calculate the amounts. It does say the ISA standards, yeah. And so what we know is there's several ways to come to different numbers with the ISA.

It does state the ISA standards.

ISA standards. So whatever. I mean, there's two ways to go about it. We could say this should be, you could do another calculation, I think, which is what Teal's asking, what Katrina was asking, going from 100 and whatever it was, 119,000 to 8,000. is using two different maths, right? Like, of the 119,000, you're using one math. You're using a math that's about the diameter of the existing tree canopies and how that relates to an equation related to that. And then you're equating how much to pay based on the new trees.

Exactly.

So it seems like maybe something's different. Sherry? Thank you, Teal, for your comments. So I think that this is probably the crux, and I guess we'll get to continue talking about this maybe. But so the question is there, I think the question for us is do we feel this is, Well, I don't know what's within the rights of this, I guess, body in the sense of like, well, this is one way that is accurate according to the ISA. There could be some other, which I think Jan was probably right, would be sort of oppressive to the, whatever it would be like 60,000 or whatever it would be to kind of make this work with the other form of calculation. but could you know commissioner rice smith is like well this also seems kind of like inadequate if we think about what it means to plant the tree and why is there 36 000 sitting there you know how long has it been sitting there you know i mean not that these are exactly our

Yeah, a lot to take in. This body doesn't necessarily always review these, so this is kind of a special circumstance, and you're being kind of edumacated to a certain degree in learning how some of these standards, and we'll be talking about this as well in some more depth as the next item comes forward. Might I offer a suggestion here? You have the opportunity to provide a recommendation. You could lean into more weight being placed on the dollar value as it's identified here. Recognizing that the 119 and shaving that down to 8,000 is bad math. And having and working with the applicant to come up with a number that is much closer to or a combination of the two because it does... The provisions within the ordinance identify kind of replacement and or dollar value. So you could look at both of those in sizing that up. So you could certainly provide that recommendation to go back and have that conversation.

I think it'd be nice to know what it actually costs to plant one of these.

Yeah, I mean... so if he's saying it's double for say a 24 inch box right for me that would be easy enough and when we have an arborist that said it costs about the value of the tree for a 24 inch box then take his 8 815 which is the actual cost to buy the actual trees and then double that figure for the cost of the physical planting of the tree. I'm OK with that.

That sounds good to me.

What does that number look like? So if we double, let's just do some fun math here.

17,630.

Yeah, so it comes out to be about 17 and change, right?

I think that might be less than the sanitary sewer hookup fee.

Per unit, yeah.

Just to let the commission know, someone from the audience that was speaking earlier who happens to be an arborist said he wants to speak again.

What?

Michael Inaba, arborist, is in the audience and he'd like to come forward again.

Please come. If you can help us get to an answer, we would appreciate it.

I want to give you some ammunition, some tools for the tool chest. So what we're talking about, Vice Chair Chesley, is two different numbers. The hundred and, what is it, 11? 117. 117. 119, 119, 119,000, that's an appraised value. That's calculated by a number of calculations we use in the secret business of arboriculture, right? The other number you have is 8,800. Yeah. OK. The $8,800 figure, that is a nursery cost installed, as I believe.

No, just the box.

That's just the trees. All right. So let's break this down. There's a few different things. First, planting. Planting a 24-inch box is a one-man job, sometimes two if they're not real strong, right? A guy can dig that hole. A guy can move a 24 inch box. You just tip it on its side and walk it over. So that's one guy. If you go up to a 36, that's the biggest manpower alone can plant. Now you've got to dig a cubic yard of soil minimum out. You create a pile of dirt that big. And that has to go somewhere. You're taking away functional ecology, shipping it off as trash. So that is more than the cost of a 36-inch box. When you get to a 48, you need a skip loader to move it or a little bobcat, something that will pick it up, restrain it, and haul it to a site. Two guys cannot move that even on its corners. So that requires a backhoe, generally, because you're moving cubic yards. down to a depth of greater than 48 inches. Well, it depends on the soil.

How big is a tree in a 48-inch box? Diameter-wise?

3 and 1 half, 4 inches maybe, 3 and 1 half. It depends on the nursery stock and the species.

OK. So you're saying that that would be more than double. It would be very expensive.

Right. So the bigger box sizes, they go up astronomically depending on location, because they have to be delivered to a job site on a flatbed. If they can be moved from the street, typically, to the planting site, then it's not really a big deal. Normally with a job site, you've got a skip loader on hand. You've got equipment. If you're talking about taking a big box and putting it over a house, cranes are several thousand a day, right? Because you have to have a crane positioned in the road, you have to get Public Works to say, yes, you can close the road, lift this thing up over the house, and drop it into the backyard somewhere. So you haven't even put it at the planting site necessarily yet, and you've already spent thousands.

As I understand it, the smaller the tree, the better the chance that it will survive. What is the comparison of the 48-inch box compared to a 24 in terms of survivability?

Well, there's a term—I'm going to go—okay, I'm not on the time limit right here? No. Okay. If we go back to England, because English are considered the world's best horticulturists, according to the English, but they're world class. Now, if we go to England, they say it's a year for every trunk inch. If you planted 24, which is an inch and a half or two, two years time to establish that tree. if we go into a 48 inch box three and a half inches maybe you're talking three four or five years to establish that tree a lot of it depends on the site the soils irrigation early maintenance all of those things make a big difference right and so one of the nursery aphorisms or sayings that we had was that in the right spot a 15 can outgrow a 36. a 15 gallon pot which is a 17 inch plastic bucket right five foot tall when you buy it maybe can outgrow a 36 inch box by year three if everything's done well and so that's the real trade-off with the larger box size you're paying more for the size at planting but it actually takes longer to get its feet and takes longer to produce that canopy what do you have to do watering wise to make this new plant survive

Without an irrigation system and I'm again looking at that Grove you cannot put in an irrigation system Because you would endanger the existing trees. So How would you go about getting those two trees in the grove to live?

You're asking excellent questions so the big concern, you know from an arborist nurseryman is If you install a foreign tree into that ecology, you're going to need to irrigate it. So the trees that are already there are already established. Their root networks are already established. They're basically looking at the newcomer like, what kind of lunch did you bring? And they're going to take that lunch. Competition. right and so that's what you have to think about when you've got an established Grove and you're gonna stick a newcomer in it do we have a class counselor that's gonna make sure they play well together I don't think so so there's there's a lot to unpack there but it can be done the question is should it be done And that's where we come back to the number of trees on the site. Does it make sense? One of the other tools I wanted to put in your tool chest is that there are two different trees available in a 24 inch box, more than that. But in this case, there's a single trunk street tree that we're all familiar with. We drive around, we see six feet of trunk and a branch and canopy on top of that. There's a reason for that. The nurseries grow that for line of sight. So vehicles passing can see around a corner. That's the way we do public space trees. In natural groves, we want natural form trees, which are a little bit harder to find in the nursery business. But they're available. And you can get them from 24s all the way up, even 15 sometimes. It doesn't really matter. You can make a 15 a natural. But once you get into the bigger sizes, it's really hard. And so you want to start off with a natural form tree that hasn't been stripped of all its lower limbs. And the big reason is in a landscape where you don't need that six feet of vertical trunk, You have to protect that six feet of vertical trunk from sunburn for several years. Most homeowners don't like the look of that, and if they don't do it, then that tree gets handicapped. The way the public works trees, they had little red leaf plums out there for 15 years. They were sunburnt from the first year, and they never went anywhere. And it's like, well, they're sunburnt, you know? Stick them in the ground, kick them real hard, and walk away. So we really want to make sure that the Planning Commission thinks about, are we putting in a natural form tree for a natural environment, or are we putting in a lollipop that really belongs on the street? And that's something that you can ask the landscape architect to specify. And you should think about that for the use of the tree, because a low branch tree can be much more versatile in a home landscape where you don't have to have that six feet of trunk that is so vulnerable to all those other problems.

Thank you. That was very informative.

Is there something in the conditions of approval to guarantee that those trees live for a certain amount of time and if they do die within a certain period of time they would have to be replaced?

So we didn't provide you with conditions of approval because you're making a recommendation to the director so you can make recommendations for conditions to go along with, yes, there isn't a, or did I?

Katrina, are you talking about the existing trees that are protected, or are you referring to the new trees coming in?

I did put a resolution here, I'm sorry.

Yeah, there is, because I'm reading a bunch of conditions.

So you can add that as an additional condition. I think that would be helpful, considering.

Yeah, I know we've done that in the past. Have you ever, have you ever,

conditioned anything regarding the protection of the existing trees if they take a beating? I mean, there were a lot of things that the contractor is going to have to study and perform.

Yeah, there's the mitigation pieces that are attached to the tree report. The existing tree ordinance has requirements for replacement. Now, what's interesting is if there's an argument to be made, if the tree dies, is it dying because of the construction that took place three years after the fact? And suddenly that becomes an issue for staff to evaluate through a tree report? I mean, those are kind of some interesting scenarios. It's hard to tell. I'm not an arborist. I do not consider myself to be a professional here. by any stretch of the imagination. So instead, I weigh heavily on what we get from the arborist reports that come out. So if there's mitigation that addresses that, then I think absolutely we should be including that as a part of the conditions. If not, we should be asking the question of what that looks like into the future.

I have another question for Mr. Ettinger. On the landscape plan, does the landscape architect specify, like what are the specifications on the tree apart from the size of the box?

Oh, you mean in terms of the shape, whether it's an upright, a street tree, or a? well whether it's a multi stem or you know like specimen or what's the kind of is there are there specifications on that I guess not within the actual species that she specified the coast live oak no but she does take it into consideration and visit all the nurseries yeah look at form and structure and sure we won't put in street trees recommendations was awesome yeah

Does this plan say where the 24-inch 36-inch or 48-inch boxes are?

I believe it does The QA is the new and then whatever the number so that's 48 The numbers are highlighted in yellow I see that I just can't read that She basically placed the bigger ones in the open spaces mostly in the front She didn't want to bring in a crane Yeah a crane would be pretty expensive And the arborist report does have a very specific and concise tree protection plan, too, that, you know, what we normally do on our sites, because, you know, not all subcontractors pay attention to those fences. They get knocked down. We actually print out little plastic signs and paste them all over the place that, you know, you have to stay outside these tree protection zones and thou shall not move them, et cetera. So we usually add those signs to our sites.

Thank you. It is kind of interesting. We have a conditions of approval compliance officer now. So that person would be charged with reviewing those conditions and going on site to ensure compliance.

Does anyone have a thought in terms of what you would like to move but not well yes we would be moving to recommend yes Making a recommendation to the director and

Thank you Commissioner regarding the resolution so it's a resolution that's making a recommendation to the Community Development Director to approve the the tree permit and the zone clearance application as submitted Where is this? So I'm looking at attachment A 1 of 9 and that's the the top statement on the top of the resolution

Thank you.

We can, I think we can make, well I can try to make a motion. Motion to adopt the Planning Commissioner Resolution number 26 with the proposed amendments to it. Increasing the mitigation fee to double what is proposed in the mitigation plan. And requiring a replacement plan for the trees that are to be planted if they fail within five years.

Would you accept a friendly amendment?

Yeah.

I would like to remove the two trees that are planted in the existing grove.

My only concern with that is as not landscape architects or arborists. I don't really know if we should make that call.

Well, I'm basing my suggestion on the arborist's advice. One of the arborist's advice.

It is not a project arborist, but he is a licensed ISA certified arborist.

Would you accept that friendly amendment? I mean what's the goal because I guess we're kind of saying that we need a replacement plan anyway so if those trees didn't succeed they would have to be But they could endanger the entire Grove because you're going to have to water them for several years and that water is going to be used by the existing trees which is detrimental to their survivability

Well, from my own experience, I've planted a tree very close to an existing tree and it's thriving. The existing oak is fine. It's in my front yard. You can all look at it. It's on the street. I don't know. I wouldn't want to take out any trees that they're willing to plant. Michael?

Thank you. So this is really something to discuss in the planning counter between planner and applicant. One of the things that I've come up with in my broader work throughout the county is when we're planting a nursery tree, into an existing native oak woodland we have to consider what the goals are and the requirement of planting a new tree means you're taking a tree from a nursery probably in Fillmore and bringing it up into Ojai Valley where it may or may not have seen 105 degrees all right it may not be ready for up here its genetics may not even be from an inland location population of coastal oak most of the coastal Oaks are from much milder climates than Ojai in fact we're toeing the line of what it can tolerate most of you are here in what was it 2018 and 2020 where we reached 118 degrees 2018 120 plus degrees in 2020 And we saw oaks brown out. They completely scorched on the outside. They're not set up for that temperature. They didn't evolve for that. They may have never seen it before in their lives, going back possibly hundreds of years. So we have to look at what the goals are of putting a foreign tree into this. And it's not just about stealing a kid's lunch, like I mentioned before. We have to take a cubic yard, a functional ecosystem, the rhizosphere, out we throw it away as trash we bring in typically heavy equipment and we dig out all of that material and we stick in something foreign something from a nursery something that may have grown up with a chemical agenda of you know we have to fight phytophthora well guess where the most fight guess where the most chemical resistant phytophthora exist It's just like hospitals. They live in the nurseries. And so when we bring in a nursery tree, we may inadvertently import diseases that can affect the local trees. And this is something that we have to put on the scale when we're thinking about, does this meet our goals? And that's why I think this is an important discussion between planners and applicants. But it's really important that all of us understand these ecological fundamentals of if this is what we want to do, let's make sure we're taking two steps forward and not three steps back. There is a big impact when you import trees. They don't always work in a given setting. What I brought up before about standards versus naturals, that's kind of a visual, like slappy in the face kind of thing. but there are other reasons why nursery trees have a hard time getting established in an oak woodland and so because of fire safety because of insurance because of budgeting because of maintenance costs we want to think about all of this so that we are ending up with a better situation than we started with chair yes

Can I ask a clarifying question? Yes. So Michael, if you could just, yeah. There's two points that are being included as a part of their motion now that we're discussing at this point. One of them is a five year replacement for Coast Live Oaks. Is that, in your experience, does that seem like an appropriate timeline?

For a 36 inch or larger, yes. For a 24, a three year period is fine.

Okay.

You'll be able to evaluate it three years if a 24 has stalled or if it's established. Failure to establish with a 24 is typically in the first 12 months. 36s and 48s are much more complicated. They can take a long time before they show their problems. You might remember, as planning commissioners, looking at the planting next door to Gosh the what was the old French restaurant on Ohio Avenue? No Suzanne Suzanne's so right next door to Suzanne somebody installed a nice 36 inch box oak tree But they didn't water it when they when they put it in so it just went And I was like, oh boy, that's gonna be a failure to establish Somebody caught it in time and turned it around and now it's alright, but that kind of thing happens a lot and You've got a landscape architect who says, here's the design. An installer who says, go plant this. And then the guy who goes to plant it says, you didn't say water it. So you want to have this continuity, everything from the planning commissioners to the planners to the applicant, down the chain, even to the maintenance, to make sure that things go well. Everybody's got a job to do. So that's really what I wanted to mention. I wanted to back up a little bit on the monetary figure. When we talk about the value of those box trees from the nursery, a 24-inch box is $205,000, as Mr. Skow mentioned. A 36-inch box is $350,000, $375,000. A 48 gets $700 something, right? I don't think that that all adds up to $8,000, but I haven't done the math. So you guys can punch through that and see if that is an installed cost or a purchase from the nursery cost. Usually, the arborist will put an installed cost because that installed cost can be deducted from the appraised value.

He figured out that there's 94 inches remaining that needed to be. And then if you divide that by the 2.2 diameter, which he's assuming the 24-inch box, then that equals 43 boxes. And that 43 times the 205 is the 8,000. No, no, no, no.

That doesn't work out. But I'm happy to run through that math with you when we're off camera in private time. Well, I mean, it's important.

I mean, what's your thought? Because that's what we're working on, problem. Right.

Microphone.

Right. So this is one of the things I wanted to speak to, that there's so much confusion about trees and arboriculture. So you have the 8,800 figure. That's nursery growing trees coming up. You have 119K going out. And you have a gap of, what is it, $110,000, $111,000. So that $111,000 is the value that's at most owed to the city in trees or in lieu payment, right?

Well, they're also planting the nine, so we have to... We've already deducted that.

We've already deducted that. So we're down from the 119 to 111, right? 110. So $110,000. That $110,000 has to be dealt with somehow, and that's really up to you guys.

I would like to see the director.

I think it's even more complicated because that number that we're talking about, that's only for the replacement of the remaining diameters.

No, no, no. That $8,800 is the cost of taking the nursery trees and putting them into the property.

No, it's the 94 inches. So we've got inches and we've got the appraised value. I mean, if you just go straight inches. So we have 125 existing inches.

I'm going to have to review this and I'll get back to you because I didn't read it that way. And it sounds to me like things got switched up.

But that's what he told us. That's what I wanted to clarify.

I think it was just a confusion.

Because he's saying that there was $119,000 of the appraised value of the trees.

To be removed.

Right. And that equates to 125.4 inches. Of diameter of trees.

OK, so yeah, there's a lot to unpack there. Because when we talk about replacement trees, diameter to square inches, surface area, that's a curve. It's not a straight line. So the bigger you go in diameter, you go up several times that.

In value.

3.14 times that in square inches of trunk surface area. And the square inches of trunk surface area are the metric we use for the appraisals. So that's where it's linked. That makes sense, because that's why the deviation is huge.

Exactly. But I think that's why it was a little confusing, because he was saying this equation, the way it's written in this proposal, is that the what's being replaced is 31.1 inches of diameter, right? And so that 31.1 is then minused from the 124 that theoretically is being removed from the site. And then the remaining 94 is being- Now we're talking diameter inches. Just diameter of inches, yeah. And that's how they came to this amount, which is the amount owed based on the remaining amount of diameter of inches that hasn't been accounted for. None of that takes into consideration the surface area, which is clearly why the deviation is $100,000.

Well, and this goes back to the ordinance, which I love the idea of fixing it, but I think it needs to be fixed the right way. Right. So when we talk about the cost of an inch, they say $100 per trunk inch. Well, that only works at the low end. Because when you go to a 48, you're $700 and 3 and 1 half inches. So now you're at $200 an inch, right? And it just goes up from there. If you have a 10-foot box, you're going to be paying CHP fees on top of the nursery cost with a crane to install it. It's just astronomical. But still, that's part of our trade. So you have to recognize that. When you take all of these trees that are being removed and you just add up the diameters, you're not compensating for what's actually being removed from the site. Sure. You're taking one third that value because the surface area of functional tree that's trapping carbon and all that is 3.14 times that. Yeah.

And that's inevitable. I mean, we can't replace what's there.

We don't want to.

And you don't want to, necessarily. The options are hardball. When it comes back to planners, it's either you reconfigure the property, the home, to save the trees, or you take the trees out. We have to find ways to reasonably develop properties. That is a property owner's right. But we also have to find ways to identify where habitat exists to protect as much of the natural character of Ojai as we can, right? And this is where we come into one of the other, I mentioned double standards, is we love oak woodlands, but we hate when trees fall on things. Well, oak woodlands fall apart all the time. They're under survival of the fittest. But when we move in, now they've got a job, right? So those trees are now, we give them room and board. They have a job. We want shade. We want beauty. We want wildlife. We don't want surprises. No fighting, no biting, right? And so we prune them. We fertilize them. We irrigate them. We treat pests when we need to. We cable them if the branches are a little bit wonky because the previous owner didn't bother. And so there's a lot of our input that extends the longevity of what was once a wild tree, basically domesticating it. We get better longevity, better performance, more affordable cost of care. It's a win-win.

Thank you. Chair. Yes. You have a motion on the table. All right. May I? Thank you, Michael.

We have a friendly amendment that has or has not been accepted yet.

That's true. Repeat the friendly amendment again.

To remove the two oak trees, replacement trees from the woodland area.

Does that mean, like, put them somewhere else on the site?

I don't think there is anywhere else to go. I suspect that this was, let's find a place to put nine trees. I don't know that we need to put nine trees in. I think that if we put in whatever the owner reasonably feels is area that's in need of a tree, that's fine.

I think that's what they're doing. That's what they're doing. That's what they're proposing.

No, because they're putting them into a grove that already exists. That's what I object strongly to.

Okay. It's a friendly amendment. Is there a second?

One more thing. Quick.

This gentleman is not our project arborist. I understand. He's very enlightened. I'm learning a lot from him, but This doesn't seem like process to me. I can speak to this man directly.

OK. Yeah.

But elsewhere, please. There is no second that Friendly fails. We are back to the original motion. There is not yet a second on it.

I second it.

OK. Any further discussion? OK. Roll call, please.

Hanson? Yes. Murphy?

No.

Chesley?

Yes.

Reichsmich? Yes. All right. You have it.

Thank you.

That was painful.

I would call that enlightening.

Yeah.

I don't think it was painful.

We learned a lot.

And educational.

Now we can continue it, right?

Since we're here, why don't we continue the conversation?

Okay.

Moving on to item four, and I don't believe I have any cards for item four. Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak to four? Anyone online? No. Okay. Then we are going to go to the staff for your report.

Thank you. Again, Lucas Seibert, Community Development Director here for the City of Ojai. That's for you as well as the people in the audience and TV Land. So what you have tonight for discussion is a kind of proposed modifications to the existing tree ordinance. Let me just give you a little bit of background information in terms of why this is before this body for comment before it goes to city council for discussion. as a concept review. This is really kind of a concept review, if you will. If you look at the way in which the attachment is worded, it's not in an ordinance format. Instead, it's got some red lines attached to it as the ordinance currently exists. But in addition to that, it has comments on the side to kind of provide some clarification. This tree ordinance itself was originally brought forward as a concept review consideration before the City Council in February of this year. At that meeting before City Council, there was a lot of conversation around whether or not the revisions that were being discussed had gone too far. And the community certainly was wrestling with a lot of the ideas that were brought forward. there was an opportunity to go back to the drawing board, and basically from that came two workshops. In this packet of information are kind of a summary of what came out of those workshops. So you've got that information empowered with the staff report, empowered with the concept review, ordinance revisions that you're seeing before you. interesting about that and it's the community input that we received you know before both of those workshops I was obviously there I don't remember if I saw any of you there but regardless the the information that you see here is meant to help inform the conversation for tonight we're not necessarily looking for a specific action but we would like to hear your comments And like what we did, for instance, with historic preservation commission, we'll take those comments and then individualize those as we move forward before city council in the future. For the workshops, I should break it down into this. The first workshop was kind of an interesting intro to the conversation when we brought in a panel of experts. Those experts were biologists, licensed arborists, and then we had somebody from Edison that was an expert as it relates to the processing of the tree. trimming, I guess we could call that, as it relates to Edison and the safety measures that they're looking at. And they're operating at a different level, more at a federal level, as it relates to how they do the trimmings. So from that meeting, we learned a lot. One of the interesting things that was learned and going back and looking at the summary is there was consensus that of an interest in adding a tree to the tree protection. That's why you see the black walnut included. It's an interesting version because it has started popping up on some of our projects recently, and it has a kind of a bat habitat, obviously for certain types of birds as well. But the bat habitat is an interesting one because that was covered in a recent bio report that identified black walnuts as being certainly habitat. So you've got to be careful in considering any sort of removal of those trees. That has been added as a potential tree, as an additional tree for preservation. That type of tree in this area has dwindled over the years, so there's a potential for bringing that back as a protected tree. that's one thing that came out of it another interesting piece that that came out of it was an interest in looking at some sort of a shared cost and and kind of leaning into that i don't necessarily have that in the report here it was certainly discussed certainly more in the second workshop than it was in the first. The first it was kind of generally discussed, but when we went through kind of the code and provisions and standards, that's really when we started hearing more of the understanding the roles and responsibilities from the city standpoint, but then also understanding the roles and responsibilities as it relates to the community. both of those kind of coming together and recognizing a shared interest in in cost so if we're continuing to move the needle towards additional trees for preservation and what those pieces look like recognizing that that cost potentially goes up for those homeowners and then recognizing that that there's a potential for shared cost so With that, I'll stop and engage the conversation here. If you have any questions, comments, certainly all ears, we can start talking through pieces that you're seeing as potential revisions, maybe questions about what items haven't been changed or modified at this point.

I had a question just about what are considered mature trees. It's in there a lot, but I didn't see it in the glossary.

Yeah, I think there's a definition for mature tree.

Yeah, I just didn't see it in the glossary, and I was looking around through it.

Attachment A, page 2 of 10.

Oh.

Yeah. It's at the bottom. Oh, OK. Yeah, my computer ran.

There we go. Yeah, mature tree.

Not changing that definition.

The interesting thing also is there was a lot of conversation and chatter as it relates to, and code compliance has seen this on the weekends where tree trimmers go out that are not certified and do tree trimmings that are inconsistent with the tree's health and then potentially spiral it into the point of failure. the tree basically declining and then potentially needing removed at some point. So there is opportunities in doing that research. I was trying to understand, there's two different ways in which to handle that kind of conversation. The first is to lean in on the ISA certification period. And you're seeing that within the definitions that are identified here. ISA has a number of certified professionals. So there's ISA-certified arborist utility specialists, ISA-certified tree climbers, ISA-certified tree worker with an aerial lift specialist. Each one of those carry a certain amount of education and then renewed education. So it's not just a matter of having it and then keeping it. You've got to continue with that education into the future. There was also an interest in both of the workshops that I heard of potentially creating our own process and it's been done in other communities where we provide the education that these community members or these members that are coming in that are doing the tree trimmings or tree removals or a combination of the two that they are and understand what our expectation is and that could be something that is still added into this maybe as a policy and then covered generally within the ordinance itself But it puts control into our hands, whether that would be some sort of a certification, them signing something. There's a bunch of different ways in which that could evolve and develop.

I just wanted to say I'm glad you put in black walnut because that comes up in CEQA. So if you have a... report done by a biologist they're going to identify the black walnut and it's going to be considered an impact if you take it from a sequence standpoint but then our code is silent on it so that it creates a conflict so i like that you're putting it in so it's consistent

Yeah, it's interesting. There was a project recently where there was a bioreport that was put together. And then that bioreport, it talked about mitigation. And initially reading it, it spoke to the protected trees that we saw. And then it brought up the black walnut and went to a pretty lengthy requirement. And that's when I learned about the bat habitation, certainly for the black walnuts.

On page attachment D, page 85. It discusses how community development department tracks the trees through the permits, what's being taken out, what's being added, and reports to the planning commission annually. I don't remember this report.

Yeah, you're reading the second paragraph?

Yes, end of it.

The department shall start tracking newly planted trees of discretionary development projects and new construction projects. Like the Public Works Department, a community development department, will track the trees per neighborhood as it relates to the target tree plantings per year. So we're learning something new as we go along here.

OK.

I bet Sherry has it. Sherry has it from, she started it at one point. So I know a long time ago it was done.

Yeah, and at one point we were tracking for Tree City USA a lot of different pieces, and it got pretty in-depth. But yeah, if we are doing it, I'm not aware of it, and it probably is something that needs to come before this body.

And it's not on a GIS map. And it's not on a GIS map.

No. Well, OK. So just so you know, I'm aware of it now. So I'll be talking with staff about it some.

Is it Public Works who decides which neighborhood and specifically where in that neighborhood to plant the new trees that the $33,000 is supposed to accomplish?

Yeah, if it's in the public right-of-way, yes. Absolutely.

Could we hear from Public Works how many trees they've planted in the last few years?

Well, annually, Public Works reports as a part of the Tree City USA. So yes, we track that specifically. And that's reportable for us to continue to maintain that.

And the number of trees they plant depends on the amount of money they have?

Not necessarily, because they've already put into the budget the number of trees that they're anticipating.

Oh, so it's limited by the public works budget to plant the trees?

Correct. Well, it's a request that goes in.

So this fund could just skyrocket if the public works budget doesn't.

Wait, say that again?

We've got 33,000 sitting there. We're probably going to add several thousand more. If the Public Works Department is limited in their planting, in how much they can spend planting trees, That in lieu fee fund is just going to continue to grow. I would like to see some accountability there in terms of using the money in the fund to help them plant the trees or something. I mean, there must be some ways that this could.

That it could be tracked is what you're saying?

Well, accomplished and tracked.

So when this particular piece, the second paragraph that I just read out loud comes forward, we can certainly include an earmark as to what Public Works status is. Because they do this on the annual. So we're aware of, well, Public Works is aware of and tracks it on the annual as a part of our City USA certification and maintenance.

OK, I guess we really can't tell them what to do, but I would like them to get the suggestion that they find a way to plant more trees.

Within the public right-of-way. So the street tree inventory, that's what we're talking about. That's the reference. Correct. The City Works record of all trees in the public right-of-way.

Correct. And within parks and other public spaces. Yeah, public spaces.

The public right-of-way exists, I think, right underneath the utility wires. So we're suggesting that they plant in the very place that is going to eventually require them to top the trees, which is, again, not a healthy thing to do.

Now remember, the trees aren't necessarily all going to be, like for instance, these are all based on neighborhoods, streets, have different varying types of trees. Not all of them are going to be protected. What we're talking about, so just understand, and I'm just realizing that I included the community forest management plan in here as well, because it's equally as an important piece as the tree ordinance itself, because this is a living and breathing document that does have tracking pieces in it, and it is something that the Public Works Department uses on the regular, because it does identify the types of trees that are to be planted within the various neighborhoods. In addition to that, there are trees that are recommended for planting, and that was just recently revised in 2022 or updated, I guess. It also has trees that are hazardous trees that should not be planted, right?

So you're saying that Public Works is likely planting shorter trees from the approved list?

I think they're being very careful. I think to what Michael Inaba had been speaking to, I think they're careful in considering the types of trees that they're planting. Yes.

Good.

Yep.

I wanted to clarify something too. The community forest management plan, says trees planted in the public realm and the city-owned lands. So I think that this is also encouraging private property owners to plant trees that are on this list in their, say, their front yards, anywhere where there's public view. So that's in the policy. So it's an encouraging thing, but it's a document. that identifies neighborhood trees in the public right of way, but also in the public realm and in the front yards.

Public realm would be, yeah, things that are visible from the public right of way. Yeah. Yeah.

So we need a lot of education. I didn't know this existed before Friday.

You didn't attend the city council meeting in 2022 when it was revised significantly? I did not.

I didn't know.

I was on the original committee to write this.

Yep.

I know they took it off when they revised it, but they kept the old Council and the old planning Commission, but they didn't keep staff your name.

Your name is inside it, isn't it? It's not on the cover.

OK, we will open the public communication.

From what I just heard are you saying that the city can tell me what I understand flammable trees invasive trees I've got all that right but essentially you can tell people what they can plant their front yard No you have a list from which to choose There's a list and you can pick one but if you want to pick something else you can't

Yeah, this is encourage private property owners to plant.

Right, I understand that. And tell you not to do the invasive stuff. No, no, I got invasive, I got fired. But when it says encourage, the next step is we want to tell you. And I just think that we should have some sort of stop there.

I would say encourage is the softest language that you can do without having the must or shall attached to it. And certainly within a document like this, it's really meant to be a guiding piece as opposed to a... Because we're going over the safety element, and there's a lot of...

now shalls there's a lot more shall shall shall shall which now requires more people to monitor more employees more this and there's so many more shells it's like they should be more like really i mean like more encouraging and i like encourage but somehow it's got to be stopped because i mean people are like there's too many shells so thank you larry public hearing is now closed

Let's see if there's anybody online. Anyone online?