City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

I don't have to go.

Mister mayor are we ready to begin.

We are ready to begin. Recording in progress okay. Good evening welcome to the regular meeting of the pendulum a city council the pendulum a community development successor agency for Monday July 6th two thousand twenty six and we have our roll call please.

For Nicole president. Kater Thompson? Here. DiCarli?

Here.

Now? Here. Quint? Absent? Shrives? Here. McDonnell?

Here.

And we do have a quorum.

Perfect. Tonight we have a closed session, a conference with labor negotiators, and I'd like to invite our Assistant City Attorney, Dylan Brady, to announce the closed session.

Sure. Pursuant to government code section 54957.6, the city representatives will be Peggy Flynn, city manager, Brian Cochran, assistant city manager, Linda Lee, deputy city manager, and Charles Sakai from Sloan Sakai, our outside counsel. The employee organization is IAFF, Unit 7 and Unit 8 compensation plan. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Let's look into public comment on the item tonight. And as always, we have public comment available for the closed session. And I'd like to ask our clerk if we've received any prior

We have not received any comments ahead of the meeting. We do have two people on the Zoom call, and so I'll read out the instructions. Members of the public attending in person should bring their speaker cards to the clerk's desk. Members of the public attending online should raise their virtual hand, and those attending via phone should press star 9 to raise their hand. We will hear in-person comments first. The mayor will call speakers to the podium, and once those have concluded, I will call upon remote speakers to unmute themselves. We do not have any in-person speaker cards, and I don't see any raised hands.

Okay, thank you. With no speakers and no one moving here and no hands up, we will close public comment on the closed session, and we will now adjourn to closed session. We will return to tonight's meeting at 6 p.m. or the conclusion of closed session, whichever comes later. Thank you.

Hello, Melanie.

Thanks.

Mr. Mayor, are we ready to begin?

We are ready to begin.

And we are recording.

We're already recording. That's fabulous. Good evening and welcome to the regular meeting of the Petaluma City Council and the Petaluma Community Development Successor Agency for Monday, July 6, 2026. As you know, or may know, tonight's meeting marks the return of remote public comments. We will once again be accepting both in person and via Zoom. This is in compliance with SB 707, which was an update to the Brown Act, California Open Meeting Law. And we're pleased to welcome the opportunity for even broader community participation and make our meetings more accessible to people who can't always join us in person. We look forward to hearing from a wider range of voices and to the increased engagement this will bring. Because this is a new process, we ask for your patience as staff gets used to the technology and works on refining things. And we know there's interest in rolling out remote comments to our committees and commissions. And we'd like to wait until we've sorted all the bugs out of the council meeting trying to do this at the same time. So as for our regular procedures, if you wish to provide a comment tonight, tonight's agenda, and you're joining us in person, please fill out a speaker card. They're located in the hallway and bring it to our clerk who is right up here in front. As per our new procedures, for those of you participating via Zoom, please raise your hand virtually when the item is called. And those participating over the phone in Zoom can raise their hand by pressing star nine, the city clerk will provide these instructions during each public comment period. And please do not raise your hand right now. Please wait till the item for when we're doing comment occurs. And so also please note, we do our meetings in concurrent translation services and in Spanish and a variety of other languages. And so to access translations online, please use the link provided in the agenda. And to access the translation in the room, please scan the QR code that's on the wall in the back to gain access. So with that, may we have our roll call for the evening, please?

Yes. Barnacle?

Present.

Cater Thompson?

Here.

DiCarli?

Here.

Now? Here. Quint Absent? Shrives? Here. McDonnell?

Here.

We do have a quorum.

Thank you, Chuck. Thank you. Let's all rise for a pledge of allegiance.

I pledge allegiance 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.

Just prior to this meeting, let me go back to, let's also have a moment of silence here. Thank you. To start our meeting, I look up and down the dais and see if any of the council members wish to change the order of any of the business this evening. I note that our workshop is really the largest I'm consuming on the Corona Station area. And I suggest that we bring our other shorter items forward. And I'd like someone to initiate that.

I'll make that motion. A second.

Thank you very much. And then, let's see. For sake of clarity, let's have a roll call vote on that. Thank you.

Barnacle?

Aye.

Cater Thompson? Yes. DeCarli? Yes. Now? Yes. Shribbs? Yes. McDonald?

Yes.

Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you. So we'll notice that in the agenda. There's a little switch going on there. And just prior to this, we had a closed session, and I'd like to invite our assistant city attorney to announce any report or at least the topic of the conversation. Sure. Nothing to report tonight. Okay. Thank you very much. And one of the fun things we do here at council meetings is we pay certain respects and honors. And this month, the proclamation that we have is for our Park and Recreation Month. And it reads, National Park and Recreation Month for July 2026. And I'd like to invite our Park and Recreation staff to come forward while we do this.

It's the right day.

Whereas the City of Petaluma recognizes that parks, trails, recreational facilities, playgrounds, open spaces, and community programs are essential to the health, well-being, and vitality of our community, providing equitable opportunities for people of all ages, abilities, backgrounds to connect, play, learn, and thrive. And whereas since 1985, the National Recreation and Parks Association has celebrated July as National Parks and Recreation Month, recognizing the dedicated professionals, volunteers, and community partners who enrich lives through parks and recreation. And whereas the City of Petaluma Parks and Recreation Department serves as a cornerstone of community life by creating welcoming spaces and meaningful experiences that strengthen connections, inspire active and healthy lifestyles, celebrate diversity, and foster a deep sense of belonging for all those who call Petaluma home. And whereas exceptional stewardship of parks, recreational facilities, natural areas, and public gathering spaces, the department protects and enhances the city's environmental resources while preserving these treasured places for future generations, supporting biodiversity, climate resilience, and the health of our local ecosystem. And whereas, Pet Limit Parks and Recreation brings people together through innovative programs, camps, aquatics, sports, arts, cultural celebrations, volunteer opportunities, and community events that encourage lifelong learning, wellness, civic engagement, and social connection. And whereas the city of Petaluma proudly recognizes the outstanding dedication and creativity and service of its parks and recreation staff, commissioners, volunteers, and community partners and program participants whose collective efforts make Petaluma's parks and recreation system a source of pride and one of the community's greatest assets. Now, therefore, be it resolved that I, Kevin McDonald, Mayor of the City of Petaluma, together with all the members of the Petaluma City Council, do hereby proclaim July 2026 as National Park and Recreation Month in the City of Petaluma and encourage all residents to celebrate by enjoining our parks... participating in our recreation programs, connecting with neighbors, and recognizing the vital role that park and recreation play in creating a healthy, inclusive, and thriving community. Thank you.

Thank you, mayor, council members, vice mayor, city manager, and community. I feel incredibly fortunate. Again, my name is Drew Halter. I'm the director of Parks and Recreation, and I'm fortunate to accept tonight's proclamation on behalf of this incredible team. Each July, we are joined by hundreds of other agencies taking a moment to celebrate all things parks and recreation, which recognizes the more than 160,000 full-time employees and recreation professionals and over a couple of hundred thousand more seasonal part-time employees that call this industry their own. You know, these are folks that all show up to maintain our parks, keep our recreation centers open, steward our history and traditions, and offer places to create community. So this year's national parks and recreation theme is the power of... and we get to fill in the blank. And that really is special for us because it really does showcase all the unique ways that Parks and Recreation creates impact at the local level. For example, the power of play, the power of community, the power of belonging, of connection, of nature, of well-being. You know, what has always been fascinating to me about Parks and Recreation as a core service is just how multifaceted our days can be and how broad a range of activities, parks, and spaces we get to support from one moment to the next. I am biased being in Petaluma, but I feel Petaluma takes this challenge to the next level. You know, not many parks and recreation agencies can start their day, you know, checking in pre-dawn lap swimmers and then finish their evening, you know, tucking in livestock at the fair. So while today is certainly a celebration of parks, it's just as much a celebration of the incredible, passionate, hardworking professionals like those that are beside me tonight that show up each and every day to make their community a better place to live and play in. And I want to call it particularly, tomorrow marks the 40-year anniversary of two City of Petaluma employees, Jim Castle, our Parks Maintenance Supervisor, and Ron Roskam, our Parks Lead Supervisor, who started on the day together 40 years ago tomorrow, all serving Petaluma uniquely in their park system. So this year, definitely a special call out to Jim and Ron, who couldn't be here tonight because they're putting... cream on their knees or something. But that just goes to show just kind of the dedication and passion that we have uniquely in Petaluma. Couldn't be prouder of them. So thank you for the team and thank you for everyone.

And as they return to their seats, I think council just wants to give a shout out for all the work going on right now in parks. Having successfully pulled off another fair for Petaluma, that's a big deal. And also having run the fireworks for the fourth. These are big over and above kinds of items that the Park and Rec Department pulls off. So thank you very much. Now we move to general public comment. And per our regular procedure during general public comment, the public is invited to make comments on items of public interest that are within the City Council's subject matter jurisdiction and not listed on the current agenda. Public comments are limited up to three minutes per person. And depending on the number of persons wishing to address the Council, time will be allocated in equal shares, totaling no more than 20 minutes. Per our new procedures, and as a reminder, we will be accepting public comments in person as well as via Zoom. As per SB707, in-person and remote commenters will be granted equal time. So if I have more than 20 people wishing to speak, the first 10 in person and the first 10 remote speakers with raised hands will be accommodated. Zoom tracks the order of the hands that get raised, and we will be working from that Zoom-generated list. In order for Zoom and in-person participants to know if they are in the first 10 or not, the names of all 10 speakers will be announced before we start. Additional comments will be heard after the last business item of the agenda. If there are less than 10 of each in person and online, we will fill from the other pool to get up to our 20 speakers for the evening. We will hear in person comments first, and I will call the speakers to the podium. And once those have concluded, the city clerk will call upon remote speakers to unmute themselves and make their comments. So let's go over to the city clerk to help us out with this next piece.

Yes, we did receive 23 public comments ahead of the meeting, and those are posted online. And I also wanted to let the group know that there are nine Zoom attendees. So at this time, I will start a 30 second clock for general public comment. And during these 30 seconds, members of the public attending in person should bring their speaker cards to my desk. Members of the public attending online should raise their virtual hand, and those attending via phone should press star 9 to raise their hand. Speaker requests received after this 30-second clock may not be accommodated.

So the clerk has advised me that there are two speaker hands up, and I believe she has handed me 18 cards. And my question back was, is that all the cards? Or you have some cards remaining?

We have 29 total cards, so I have the rest of the stack, and this will be ready for you.

So if I read your name, you'll be in the period right now. And if you don't hear a name, that means that when we open public comment at the end of the meeting, your name will be called at that point. Okay. So the speakers and the order for tonight's in-person will be Calvin Volantes, Johanna Arango, Renee Salvaceto, Gloria McAllister, Eric Vasquez, Kat Nazarao, Kirk Lott, Nizar Ahmad, Antonio Jimenez, Alana Feldman, Eric Leland, Dennis Posike, Jennifer Boyle, Tina Yonkers, Mark Kimberley, Susan Hussey, Caitlin Quinn, and Hayesh Swanhauser. So those are in-house. And with 20, we'll be setting the clock at 20 minutes to one minute per person for cards. And two points. One minute goes fast. you know, you'd be shocked how fast it goes. So please try and get right to your point so we can hear you. And then second point is, if you have more that you wish to add, you can email it in and it gets to become part of the record that way. So our first speaker, as I noted, was Kalvia Walantas, to be followed by Johanna Arango.

Hello. Hello, my name is Calvin. I'm a Petaluma resident here with a coalition of other Petaluma residents. There's a few of us, as you can see. I'm asking you to pass an ordinance for no cooperation with ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, preventing the use of any city resources for ICE unless ordered otherwise by a judicial warrant. A binding ordinance is the moral, legal, and logical next step from the 2025 resolution that this council passed. It would build trust between our immigrant neighbors and the public services intended to serve them. Such an ordinance is constitutionally protected by the 10th Amendment, and similar ordinances have been well practiced in many other cities around the country. Let's stand up for our immigrant neighbors and join the other brave jurisdictions around the country who have already taken this step. I believe other members of my team have already provided each of you with a draft of this ordinance, and now I hope you will listen to other members of the community who have similar sentiments. Thank you.

Thank you. So on a decorum basis, we will say start. You'll see the clock start. We're going to ask no applause to the end or no cheering or jeering. We'll maintain decorum so speakers can have their minute and make that point. And so our next speaker is Joanna Arango to be followed by Renee Saucedo.

Saucedo.

Saucedo. Thank you.

Good evening, everyone. I'm Joanna Arango from Oaxaca. Mexico, and I'm here with Almas Libres. We are part of Sonoma County Sanctuary Coalition. I've been living in Petaluma for 29 years, and I feel very fortunate to be here. As a Petaluma resident, I want to represent my community. We as immigrants feel fear to speak up. However, we highly support this new law. I personally support a new law of no collaboration with ICE in Petaluma because I will feel safe. I would like to respectfully ask all the members of our city council to please pass this new law so my immigrant community can be protected from ICE. You should not say, God bless America, if you don't care about your neighbor. Peace to all. Thank you.

Thank you. Rene Saucedo, to be followed by Gloria McAllister.

Good evening. Renee Saucedo with the Sonoma County Sanctuary Coalition. Due to Trump's enforcement practices and repression, there is an entire community in Petaluma living in terror and extreme emotional distress. That is why most of them are not here. There's nothing more frightening than being forcibly separated from your family, than potentially being indefinitely incarcerated in inhumane conditions. Studies conducted by the Immigrant Legal Resource Center as well as other well-respected organizations affirm the obvious, that immigrants don't feel safe dealing with local officials, especially law enforcement. There is no trust And that puts everyone in danger when people don't want to report crimes or serve as witnesses to crimes.

Thank you very much. Gloria McAllister to be followed by Eric Vasquez.

Good evening to all of you.

My name is Gloria McAllister and I have lived in Petaluma since 1990. I'm also a lead coordinator for Petaluma Dia de los Muertos. It breaks my heart to see our immigrant community grow fearful, so fearful that they feel unsafe participating in their own cultural celebrations. Their children ask why, why can't we go out there to enjoy our culture. It's time to help our immigrant community return to their tranquil lives. They deserve peace. They deserve protection. I urge our council members to pass a citywide non-cooperation ordinance now. Important. Immigrants are law-abiding citizens. They are our neighbors. They are our friends. Let's recognize their contribution. for making our Petaluma much better. They deserve kind and fair justice.

Thank you. Eric Vasquez to be followed by Kat Nazaro.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor and council members. My name is Eric Vasquez, and I stand here today in solidarity with our community, urging you to place a non-cooperation ordinance on our agenda so migrant workers in this city can stop living in fear. If this federal administration has taught us anything, it's that we can no longer afford the niceties in the face of clear threats to our neighbors' livelihoods. It was this council just last year that first took up a resolution protecting our immigrant neighbors. Unfortunately, it wasn't unanimous. That hesitation was rooted in the fear that protecting people would be a liability to our funding. Those fears didn't come true. Our county sued, the court sided with us, and Petaluma still stands. A non-cooperation ordinance takes that hesitation off the table for good. Dozens of cities and counties have already stopped sharing resources with federal immigration enforcement. Thank you.

Thank you. Kat Nazario to be followed by Kirk Plott.

Hi, my name is Kat Nicario, and I'm a granddaughter of immigrants that fought against fascism, an imposing force, and a threat to our civil liberties and freedoms. This town is riddled with an unjust displacement of first indigenous peoples and the Chinese laborers who built the railroads, shaped the rivers, and tended to our land. When they were deemed no longer valuable, they were forced out. This is in a distant past. And in this last year, the leadership acknowledged the hard work of those families and the wrongs of displacement by dedicating a park and erecting a plaque. The immigrants currently in this community is what keeps it going. They grow our food, they create our wine, they make our restaurants, stores, schools, and communities run. I know this community will protect them with everything they've got. So whether this council chooses to cooperate with ICE or not, to be there on the right side of history or the wrong, I know this community will protect them come hell or high water. Here is a moment to protect this community in real time. Show you've learned from the lessons of the past instead of dedicating a park and a plaque in 50 years down the road. Thank you so much. Thanks, Sangbaksa. Thank you.

Kirk Locke to be followed by Nisar Ahmad.

Thank you, Mayor McDonald and members of the council. As you well know, I've been in business here in Petaluma for 41 years, starting August of next month. In that time, we've seen this community grow. We've seen diversity expand. It wasn't always that case. At one time, there were a lot of Chinese actually helping to build Petaluma, and yet they went away because of the 1882 exclusionary laws and anti-Chinese sentiments. We don't want to see that happen again with any other immigrant communities. I think it's our responsibility as citizens of Petaluma to make sure that we fight for our immigrant communities. Immigrants are the ones that built the U.S. Our 250-year anniversary would not happen if it wasn't for immigrants. And they come from all over the world. And we need to continue to inspire future generations of immigrants to come.

And I thank you. Thank you. And our next speaker is Nisar Ahmad. And to be followed by Antonio Jimenez.

Hello, Mr. Mayor, city council members. My name is Nisar. I graduated Casa Grande. I went to school in Kenilworth, in the old campus, by the way. And I graduated in McDowell School, where my parents live, down the street from where I went to elementary school. So I'm from this community. And I represent a bunch of organizations, the North Bay Organizing Project, Jobs with Justice, Health Care Workers for Peace, Equality, and Community Empowerment. I'm a healthcare worker. But most importantly, I represent seven, seven generations. My great grandmother, my grandmother, my parents, my cousins, and their children, so seven. We're part of this community and what I'm going to say is I'm really busy. And I'm not going to stand by and watch as detention centers are being built on top of Japanese internment camps being built on top of Bureau of Land Management.

Thank you.

So I yield my time to the next person.

Antonio Jimenez to be followed by Elena Feldman.

Good evening, honorable counsel. Tonight I stand before you using the alias Antonio Jimenez because I'm a child of undocumented immigrants and I feel for the safety of my family if I were to show my face while I tell my story. I grew up in the Obama administration when even the first black president meant a record number of deportations of my people. I grew up in the California of the early 2000s when undocumented immigrants couldn't hold a driver's license and myself and my siblings feared every right then like it might be the last time we ever saw our parents. I grew up feeling inferior in my own country, my birthplace, because I quickly learned that some people deserve more protections because of the color of their skin. It's never been about legality. Speeding is also illegal and might add more reckless and dangerous to others. If the retroactive punishment for speeding 30 years ago was the relinquishing of your Fourth Amendment rights and being kidnapped and shipped off to a concentration camp, would you willingly accept that because you shouldn't have broken the law? My family has been paying their taxes in Petaluma for decades, and I'm right there behind them. I urge you to adopt a non-cooperation ordinance and be on the right side of history. Thank you.

Thank you. Elena Feldman, to be followed by Eric Leland.

Hello, my name is Ilana, member of the Sonoma County Sanctuary Coalition. I've been a resident in the Petaluma community for more than 22 years. I'm here this evening to speak on behalf of my immigrant community. the hands that harvest the food on our table, the hand that hold those of our sick and our elderly when they're in nursing homes and hospitals. I'm here today because our community is under threat. The very people who sustain us are living in fear, the constant threat of ICE. ICE, the domestic terrorist organization spreading across the United States, fueled by hate, corruption, prejudice, and lawlessness, continues to grow. attaining new facilities to cage human beings in inhuman conditions, kidnapping our neighbors with no due process, no judicial warrants, hiding their identities behind masks, armed with guns, tear gas, batons, perpetrating violence with no remorse. The whole world is watching. How is this happening?

Thank you. Eric Leland, to be followed by Dennis Posike.

Hi, my name is Eric Leland. I served on a committee for public safety in town, and I'm a legal observer trainer. It's important that we all understand that all of us here, everyone in the dais, everyone behind me, works together for community safety. Public safety is community safety. We keep each other safe. You may not be aware, but there's literally thousands of people in this community doing various mutual aid and support for each other in this town on a daily basis, right, because of this crisis. So I urge you to put on the agenda the non-cooperation ordinance at the soonest possible moment, and for all of you this time, not most of you, but all of you this time, to support that ordinance when it comes up. Thank you.

Thank you. Dennis Postakate should be followed by Jennifer Boyle.

Tess, am I okay? Thank you for allowing me to speak. I'm Dennis Boske, I'm from Petaluma. I'm also the grandchild of immigrants, and I treasure most of my one grandmother that when she sent my dad to school the first day, she got a letter back from the teacher saying, Emil can't even write his name. She sent a note back saying, that's why I'm sending him to school. probably not quite spelled right. I was coached all throughout my career. It wasn't like it is now, but I was told to lie low, don't make waves, and do the best you can. I think that's a Slavic thing anyway, but I have great respect for my grandparents, and I'm pretty sure that none of them were educated. They were so uneducated at that point in time that someone committed a mistake in the progress, and thank you. Thank you.

Jennifer Boyle to be followed by Tina Yonkers.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council, and staff. Diverting a little bit off the topic, but on to we have experienced for some time now the weaponization from large bad actor equity mobile homeowners against the most vulnerable mobile park residents here in Petaluma. the unfair consumer business practices, the imbalance of wealth and weaponizing, the fair market increase application, the weaponization of the closure conversion process mandated by state law AB 2782, using the legal systems for frivolous lawsuit one after the other, and of course, the strategy of bringing down any residents who stands up for their rights must never be rewarded by any city or country. We remind all of the...

Thank you.

Thank you.

Tina Yonkers, to be followed by Mark Kimberly.

Good evening. We remind all those arbitrators resulted in zero rewards once the park opened up their books using the MNIO standard method of discernment. Little Woods Park owners served the residents again on July 3rd with a fourth attempted arbitration increase. Does it make sense that three years with this applied attempt to close the park Three appeals to zero awards. They received in the past three arbitration attempts, a new lawsuit against the city as well as other lawmakers against the city that attempt arbitration even take place. These large equity owned lawsuits. owners warned all of us that we do have to keep up with their demands or they will litigate or will be forced to submit to their actions. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Mark Kimberly to be followed by Susan Hussey. Mark, are you in the house? Okay. Susan Hussey to be followed by Caitlin Quinn. Susan, are you in the house? Are you Susan? No. Okay. No Susan. Going once, twice. Thank you. Caitlin Quinn.

Hello.

To be followed by Haya Swanheiser.

Thank you all for the time. I am here. I'm not here speaking for anybody, but I am a school board trustee with Petaluma City Schools. Y'all, we did this so long ago in Petaluma City Schools. It's really not that hard. It's pretty straightforward. No one should be cooperating with ICE unless there's a judicial warrant. That's just common sense, I fear. It's not radical. It's not leftist. I'm also the president of Planned Parenthood Northern California Workers United. We have seen a huge downturn in our patients coming to see us and getting necessary health care. People are terrified. And if this little thing that takes you all 15 minutes can make even two people feel safer, isn't that worth it? It is. So I thank you all for your time, and I know you'll do the right thing. At least most of you. I have not a lot of faith in a few of you.

Thank you. Hiya, Swanhauser.

Four days ago, the Sebastopol chief of police told a concerned resident that ICE is law enforcement. If this is accurate, ICE should be held to the standards of other law enforcement agencies, but it's not. Instead, lawlessness and contempt for human life appear as standard policy within ICE. Brady Tillett wrote from the California City Detention Center that the rule of law does not exist inside detention for me or for the countless others I've met during my time in ICE custody. ICE is not law enforcement. The Eighth Amendment of the Constitution protects every prisoner's right to get medical care. Yet again and again, we're faced with direct reports of medical neglect across ICE detention facilities. ICE is not law enforcement. I think this council values the law, especially when the law reflects our collective values of inclusion, diversity, and respect for all residents. We are asking this council to place a non-cooperation ordinance on the agenda for action as soon as possible and to adopt it into law.

Thank you. At this point, we'll move over to our remote callers and ask the city clerk to bring in our remote callers.

Yes, the first speaker will be Jennifer Kaye. Please go ahead with your comments.

I just got the unmute notice, but this is not Jennifer Kay. This is Darren Rackus, and so I'll jump into my one minute and get it out of the way. Just following up on the hotel incentive program that was discussed at our last meeting, Morgan Hill's similar TOT RevShare incentive program was referenced as kind of a model, and it was interesting digging into that. It was actually a developer partnered with Appalachian as the hospitality group that rolled that out in Morgan Hill. And if they've brought that idea to Petaluma, great, let's assess it. But in Morgan Hill, they did get hard cost figures. So in that instance, it was MOHI was the name of the hotel in Morgan Hill that needed a rev share agreement. And they got firm cost figures on what the hotel needed, how much gap there was to fill with the TOT rev share agreement. If we are going to do the same thing and jump into the, you know, Appalachians plan, let's make sure that we demand good cost figures as well. Thank you.

The next speaker is Alan W. Please unmute yourself and make your comment.

Hi, yes, thank you. My name's Alan Wolves and I'm a lifelong Sonoma County resident. I'm requesting that you, as soon as possible, agendize and then pass a non-cooperation ordinance with ICE, against ICE. Dozens, if not hundreds, of cities and counties in California, including the county of Sonoma and Santa Rosa, have taken this really important step to protect their community members from this lawless, fascist organization. I don't need to go over all the systemic abuses that ISIS committed against both undocumented and documented residents who they just suspect of being immigrants. We have to do everything in our power to stop this abuse and protect our community members. The Trump administration announced four days ago they're stepping up worksite immigration enforcement operations, so the time to do this is right now. Please show your community that you care about all of its members. Thank you.

And that concludes our online, our Zoom participants. And then that closes general public comment. And with that, that brings it up to council comments. And I think I'm just going to add a little editorial note right here regarding ICE Out. I appreciate you being here. I appreciate the meetings I've had with Dennis and the other leaders of the effort. And And as I look out in the audience, I see many of my friends who I've chatted with about this. And we're all very concerned regarding protections for the immigrant communities in California. I mean, and frankly, for our own basic civil rights. It's a horrible state we're in right now. In response to growing concerns about the federal government seeking to entangle states and local agencies in immigration enforcement in ways that do not comport with the law, the state of California legislator has recently enacted a bill, SB 580, which will require California Attorney General to develop and publish Modeled policies that demonstrate how state and local agencies should interact with immigration enforcement in a manners that are lawful and consistent and we've been invited to Join into that conversation with them I think this has gotten statewide attention that this needs to happen on a statewide level and and that's an important part It's fair to say You know we see you we hear you This past weekend, 4th of July, big opportunity for speech making. The mayor gets to make speech. And I just want to drop two of the quotes that I used in my 4th of July at our, here in our Petaluma Historic Museums event. One was Jesse Jackson, America is not a blanket, one piece of unbroken cloth, the same color, the same texture, same size. America is a quilt, many patches, many pieces, many colors, many sizes, all woven together and held by a common thread. And the other one that I left with was Americanism is a question of principle, of idealism, of character. It is not a matter of birthplace or creed or line of descent. That's Teddy Roosevelt. So I think we hear you. And with that, I'd like to have council comments start with Council Member Cater Thompson.

Thank you. The mayor and I signed an agreement to put this on an agenda. And so I'm assuming we're going to be moving forward with that. I'm not sure when it's going to be on the agenda. I'm kind of curious about timing, and maybe we could have a conversation about that. And I think I'm just going to leave that as my comment. I mean, many of us are actually children or grandchildren of immigrants that came here, and they left their country for the very same reason why many people left their country, because they were not welcomed. And my grandmother came by herself. Three years later, she went through the Siberian Rail, through Japan, into Seattle, and then to Minneapolis, where he worked at the shipyards. And then they all moved to Petaluma in the early 1900s. Immigrants, we've made this country. And we want to continue being part of it, and we don't want to be separated out. That's who we are. We're in horrible times right now. I mean, even soccer can't be played with the horrible person trying to make the rules. And we can fight this, and we need to fight it locally, but we also need to fight it at the state level because the state needs to get on parity with the cities and start working with us. And another point is I also graduated from Kenilworth, the old one, along with you. And let's see, a few other things. The mobile home parks, when people talk, they're being terrorized by these corporations trying to buy up these parks, kicking people out, and just taking the land. And so we're all in this together, and we will bring this back soon. And I do wanna reiterate that it's important that we do work with the state, see what their language is, so we can incorporate that and incorporate our language also in an ordinance. Thank you.

Thank you. The quorum, please. Council Member Barnicle.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, everybody in the audience. I hope everybody had a pleasant long weekend. I appreciate Councilmember Cater-Thompson and the Mayor bringing forward an ordinance request or an agenda request item. I certainly look forward to supporting that. I appreciate everybody who's here tonight. Most importantly, I appreciate all the work you're doing outside of the City Hall. to keep people safe, make people feel safe to the extent that you can. And while I'm not always there with you, I'm very much appreciative of you and moved by the stories I'm hearing and moved by all the work you're doing. So thank you very much. On a report out from some of my other committees, Planning Commission met a couple weeks ago and we adopted a commercial sort of streamlining pilot for one parcel where an owner wanted to basically make it easier to bring in more smaller tenants. I think it has applications for other parcels throughout the city. So I'm looking forward to seeing how that rolls out. And we also adopted a resolution recommending to the council to allow pools and spas at the Scott Ranch property where there are the 28 units that are there. Basically every other single family home in Petaluma is allowed to have pools, spas, hot tubs, things like that, but not those 28 for some reason. And then on Sonoma Clean Power, we opened up the business one-stop shop, which I'm really happy about. It's up at... 530 E Street in Santa Rosa. And this is a loan that the Sonoma Clean Power made to a group of people, but really led by Hector Velazquez, the executive director of the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce of Sonoma County. to create a one-stop shop really focused on multicultural business support services. A lot of, it's sort of fitting tonight, but a lot of people who, you know, English is their second language, it's tough to make sense of permit applications and things like that, and this center is basically a place where you get sort of white glove services with business advising, formation, licensing and permits, loan readiness, access to capital, marketing and visibility. They have a green room where you can go in and film your commercial. They've got workshops and clinics and a co-working space. And so it's just getting off the ground right now, but really excited about it. And it'll be working with our economic development department, the chambers of commerce around Sonoma County and things like that to really bring more business support services for early entrepreneurs. And their tagline is, entrepreneur spirit has no color, gender, or ethnicity. It has fire, passion, and resiliency. So I really am proud of that investment that we made. And then the final thing, we finished the fair. Thank you to all the staff who worked there and helped make it possible, and all the patrons. I think I saw my first ever mosh pit at the Petaluma Fair. So that was cool. First for everything. And also I just want to say thank you to Council Member Now for really just going above and beyond. She was there volunteering for like a week leading up to the fair at least to basically revive this long unknown little parcel of a flower garden and just being everything like Mrs. Petaluma or Miss Petaluma in terms of loving the fair and really bringing the spirit of it. And I think the energy and the commitment to community was ever present with that. So thank you very much.

Council Member Shribbs.

Thank you. Just for the folks out there, my father was an immigrant, and on my mother's side, her parents were immigrants and had similar fears when they arrived. So, yeah, so I feel you. Also, I went to the fourth... celebration with bell ringing at the museum and one of the most interesting and inspiring statements was that by a Brigadier General who actually lives here in town and one of the things he talked about he's also historian and basically brought up the point that there was like over 50 signers on their Declaration of Independence and most if not all suffered greatly through the war and afterwards many losing their lives kicked out of their homes, went bankrupt, everything taken away from them, and they were on the run and had to be out in camps in various ways, basically homeless for a while. So lots of suffering from the process. So that was inspirational here that our folks, our founders, took it upon themselves knowing that that was going to happen to them, but they did it anyway. So yeah, we need to take action. So one of the things I did, I went to a workshop on AI tools, and they said, oh, government could really use this. It was by a Stanford professor type person, and they said for regulations, permits, data, searches, reviews alike, and even ordinances. So I went to this morning and I asked AI about, can you create an ordinance for ICE? And so I did. And I found out more information. Turns out they have recently doubled the number of quota for ice to capture right now. Doubling on a daily basis, like 2,000 people quotas now is being set. The other thing I found out is that The detentions are anywhere from a month to over a year, and that over 90% of the folks are actually deported. So it's really sad and bad. Look at what they're doing, similar to brown shirts of Nazi Germany. Really terrible. So anyway, so I asked Google AI to come up with an ordinance in particular for Petaluma to help strengthen the ordinance that was already supplied to us. So I have that here. I'm going to pass it over to legal so they can take a look at it and maybe make what you suggested stronger. Okay, on other business, North Bay Watershed Reuse Authority has decided to rename themselves to North Bay Water Resiliency Authority. Change the word resiliency so that we can start working on collecting water, distributing water, And then reusing water. So they're expanding their mission tremendously. So the resiliency is crossing over into other missions of generally just water supply. And as well as the mission that I'm also on the North Bay Watershed Association. So sea level rise, ground waters, water supply. So there's going to be more groups working on our current issues all around water in combination with Sonoma water. Ag and open space. I happen to be the vice chair of that at recent meetings and there we are just converted over to zoom meetings there also. And there was a grand jury report by the Sonoma County grand jury giving huge praise to ag and open space about what when the best organizations we have here in the county delivering on the taxation monies that we've been delivering and how it's being used and how that staff is doing a great job of preserving agriculture, which also adds to improving our water supply here in the county and our watersheds. There was another meeting in town here at the downtown about the vacancies, and so a citizen group has come together to be aware of that, and they're going to help the city along. And there's lots of discussions, pros and cons, of carrot and stick approaches to how we can change vacant lots, maybe even vacant stores, into more productive units here in town. So there's a citizen effort to help out with the city on that. And then finally, the Aquas community is developing, and so they asked me to join. So I'm on a subcommittee there to help the new Aquas community to create more community and better relationships here in town. So I'll be supporting that effort here also, in addition to the other duties I have. So that's the report I have today.

Thank you. Council Member Nowell.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. For my council liaison report tonight, I have two committee reports. First, the Public Safety Advisory Committee had a presentation and discussion regarding the Petaluma Police Department's annual military equipment use, which the report will be given to the City Council on August 3rd. And the public is welcome to National Night Out held at our fairgrounds on August 4th, where they can see and ask questions about our military equipment. Also at our public safety meeting, the subject of Petaluma having four flock license plate readers were brought up once again. So tonight I bring the subject to the attention of the City Council to possibly have on a future agenda for discussion. As a reminder to all that the Petaluma Police Department's policies are on our city's websites. The Sonoma County Homeless Coalition has had a few meetings in the past month. The Director of Health Services gives us updates to the committee members regarding the changes happening in funding and consolidating services. Mental Health Services Act, which then said in June, the goal is to minimize the impacts on individuals who depend on these services that are being impacted by the federal cuts. On a positive note, I want to thank our city's Park and Rec staff, I think most of them have left, Drew's still here, for not just the wonderful 2026 fair, Thank you, Councilmember Barnicle, because I couldn't have done it without staff and our contractor, Dibble. The wonderful 2026 fair was put on by our staff. An awesome fireworks show was put on by our Parks and Rec staff. So thank you for a great show over the weekend, on Saturday, and I heard lots of positive comments regarding both from community members. Awesome, after the museum's annual bell ringing, I stopped in at numerous local parks and took photos because those were locations to see the fireworks. All the parks looked amazing and lots of community enjoying them, praising how well our parks looked. So, like the song, Saturday in the park, it must have been 4th of July. Thank you, city staff. Thank you to the mayor and council member, Cater Thompson, this evening for the announcement of a future agenda item regarding ICE. It is very close to my heart. My ancestors were the blue-eyed Spaniards that came up through Mexico and built the missions and were the early Californians and hard workers and were not appreciated. My other ancestors were also farmers, Irish and Swedish. Life was not easy for these people, and we want to go into the future making it easy for our community to feel safe at night and the day. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor? Good evening, everybody. First, at Airport Commission, we did have a conversation about non-airport uses and storage at the airport to try to kind of better assess, you know, a lot of stuff from the city is stored and used there, and so the Airport Commission would like to know kind of how that balances out. That conversation can end up coming back, except there was not a clear ending to that conversation. I'd also like to congratulate the Pendulum Area Pilots Associations, which are all mostly commissioners and everybody else in that group, for their big airport bash they had a couple weekends ago. And they had a little over 2,000 people out to the airport, lots of little kids out there to see airplanes. you know, enjoy the aviation community and see what it's all about. So they did a great thing there. They have completed step one of the taxiway project, the first five-day closure of it. There's another one coming up later this month. And then the taxiway should be finished. Business can resume there. Runway is open. Over at Parks and Rec, we received a presentation from an Eagle Scout who wants to do a project in adding a batting cage out there to one of the Little League fields. And so he's been working with staff on that. And that's a project that looks like it's going to happen. So that's pretty cool. It's pretty ambitious for that little guy. And then, you know, I'd like to thank staff for getting through the fair. I know they worked very hard, long extra hours to make it happen and give that to the community. So thank you for that. at Ag and Open Space. Probably the biggest highlight from that that John didn't mention was the Board of SOUPS. They passed a resolution to support the ag industry and further a, you know, kind of a working economic plan to help them and ensure that that, you know, is prioritized and those farmers are taken care of in the county. And then hope everybody enjoyed the 4th of July. And thank you again to Parks and Rec for the fireworks. It was a great show. Hope everybody was able to enjoy that. And then, you know, I know there's been a lot of rising concerns about data centers around. And, you know, I'm going to be, you know, if it needs to be a council discussion, I think it should be, but I'm going to be meeting with staff to try to work out if that's even possible here, what steps can be taken. And then, you know, if we're all good, we're all good. But if it needs to come to council, we'll have a discussion about that. And then I do appreciate everybody that came here tonight. And I do believe that everybody sitting up here wants the best for our immigrant community. And I think that we're very fortunate to have our police department. They work very hard. They work very close with everybody. And I know that they care about the immigrants a lot as well. So thank you.

Great point. Thanks for doing that. I know all the chiefs are on board, and they get the same message we do. It's ICE that is not policing that we need to worry about. I do want to note my liaisons and other appointments. June 29th, I attended a five-year anniversary of the Petaluma office. Immigration Institute of Bay Area. I was there five years ago when it opened. And the big change is how many more lawyers they have doing that civil rights work. They just won a case in San Francisco Federal Court. An immigrant was arrested during his citizenship hearing. I mean, when you tell these stories, it's just powerful. On June 24th, I led a discussion with the assistance of city manager with Los Cien, our community, Latino community, for Latinx leadership, and they brought together in our council chambers quite a few to hear the status of the city. I also attended the AAPI Coalition of North Bays event with my friend Kirk Lott here. And it's just important that we constantly network and see and be seen with each other. And that's how we get further. I attended a county food convening, and as Councilmember now mentioned, federal cuts are coming this year, and food is going to be a crisis as both SNAP and CalFresh are going to be reduced, and that impacts the poorest. And so the county is trying to step into that space. I also spoke with the Petaluma Lodging Associations, and they appreciate hearing more about what the city's economic development programs could be because, as we know, costs are outpacing revenue right now. I got to emcee the Santa Rosa Symphony here at our library. That was kind of fun. I also helped with the chamber's leadership graduation class, and then There's just so much going on here. I'm glad to hear all the praise for the fair this year, and I want to thank the city manager as well as staff for that. And with that, do you have anything to report tonight?

I'll keep it short, but I want to recognize our community. We see you, we hear you, and we stand united with you, and you can hear that from our council, so thank you. Also want to announce that this Wednesday at 6 o'clock here in council chambers, staff will be holding the Howard Street Improvements Community Meeting. Next year, we're going to be replacing sewer and water mains, upgrading curb ramps, and reconstructing the pavement on Howard between A and West. So we are going to take this opportunity to improve the safety and accessibility for all road users on Howard. And we're excited to reengage the community, hope that you can either be at the meeting or share your feedback online and translation services will be available upon request. Thank you very much.

Thank you. So now let's not break the decorum. Thank you for being here tonight. We're going to move into business items if you wish to exit. Okay, moving on to the consent calendar for the evening. I take a look up and down the dais and see if anyone wishes to pull any item from consent calendar. And seeing none, we'll move to any questions on the consent calendar or comments, might I say. And I think it is important to note that we added that future agenda item that Councilmember Kater-Thompson and I think we've all heard that's in the works. Time uncertain, but we're looking forward to it. A question, Vice Mayor?

No, thanks. No.

Not at this time. Okay. So let's open it to public comment, and I'll ask the clerk if there was any comments on the consent calendar.

We did not receive any comments ahead of the meeting. I will note that there are eight people in the Zoom meeting. And at this time, I will start a 30-second clock. Whoops. I'll start at 6 o'clock. Members of the public attending in person should bring their speaker card to my desk if they have not already done so. Members of the public attending online should raise their virtual hand, and those attending via phone should press star 9 to raise their hand. Your request received after this time may not be accommodated. Sorry about that. I lost my mic. We didn't receive any cards, and I don't see any raised hands.

Okay. Thank you very much. And that closes public comment on the consent calendar. Looking for a motion?

I'd like to move items one through six on the consent calendar.

Thank you. Motion by Shribs. Second. And second by Cater Thompson. And with that, a roll call vote, please.

Particle?

Aye.

Peter Thompson yes to Carly yes now yes trips yes McDonald yes motion carries unanimously thank you.

And if you were here at the beginning of the game, you would have noted that we've moved our workshop, which was listed as the next item, down in the order. And we are now moving to public hearings, matters for consideration, a resolution awarding a design-build contract to Alton Construction for the Petaluma Public Safety Project. And I'd like to invite George Goeigen, project manager, to come on up.

Just give me a second, I'll try to set this up.

And for a project this size, we have the honor of having two chiefs in the room. Thank you for being here.

All right. Good evening, Mayor, council members, staff, and members of the public. Tonight, we are, so my name is Paul Gagan, Senior Project Manager, Petaluma Public Works. Tonight, we are requesting that City Council adopt the resolution awarding the design-build contract for the Petaluma Public Safety Facility project to Alton Construction. This is a major milestone for the city. The project has completed entitlements, received approval of the design intent, and gone through a competitive design-build procurement process. Tonight's action authorizes the city to enter into an agreement with Alton and move the project into final design and construction. So, quick project overview. The project is located at the intersection of Kenilworth Drive and Johnson Drive at the fairgrounds, and will bring together a new police headquarters, fire department headquarters, a new fire station number four, and a dedicated emergency operations centre, all in one coordinated public safety campus. The new police headquarters will replace the existing police station, while fire station four will be an additional fire station that expands the city's emergency response capacity. a little history here on how we got here tonight. So this project's been several years in the making and has moved through a series of planning, funding, design, and public approval milestones. The project began with Measure U in 2020 and the city's commitment to invest in public safety. That was followed by an operational analysis and the 2023 Public Safety Facilities Master Plan, which identified the need for an additional fire station, significant improvements to the city's police facilities, and a preferred strategy of bringing those functions together in a centrally located consolidated facility. In November 2023, staff presented council with a preliminary vision of that project. That version occupied approximately five acres and included about 73,000 square feet of building area, relied on a phased delivery approach that would not have been completed until 2035, and it carried a total project cost of approximately 142 million and construction costs of 120 million. Council naturally pushed back and the direction was staff was instructed to pursue a more affordable and deliverable project with a better schedule and a smaller footprint. So in response, the city knuckled down. Through 2024 and 2025, the city shifted to a design-build-delivery method, reduced the fillity size by optimizing shared spaces, simplified the construction approach by utilizing a tilt-up concrete construction, and established a target construction cost of approximately $55 million. In 2024, Measure H was approved, which provided an additional funding source for the project. In 2025, the city presented the revised project to the Planning Commission and City Council. That version reduced site footprint by approximately 1.5 acres. It reduced the building size by about 42%. And it brought the construction costs in line with our $55 million target. And it established a target completion date of 2028 for the entire facility. The city then completed the basis of design, detailed programming, environmental review, and the entitlement process. Earlier this year, council approved the financing strategy and the city completed the competitive design build procurement process. So tonight's contract award is the next major step in this timeline. If approved, the project will move into a final design, permitting, and construction with occupancy targeted for mid-2028. I'll just quickly talk about design-build here because this is not how we typically deliver projects in the city. We usually go to design-bid-build or redesign it and we put it out to bid and then it gets built. This project is slightly different, so I'll just quickly explain. Every project goes through a life cycle of SD drawings, which is schematic design. Then you have design development, which is the engineering to get that schematic design into reality. Then you have your CD phase, which is your construction documentation, where you submit through building and you get your permits to build. So the city has already completed the schematic design and portions of early design development on this project. We've defined what the facility will look like, how it will function, how it's laid out, and the materials and performance standards that we expect. Those requirements are captured in what's called bridging documents. So Alton is not starting over. Its team will take the approved vision and complete the detailed engineering, permitting, and construction documents needed to build it. The benefit of this design build is that the designer and the contractor work together under one contract, giving the city a single point of responsibility for completing the rest of the project. So, for the procurement method of design-build being slightly different, the City used a two-step competitive procurement process. First, we issued a request for qualifications to identify design-build teams with the experience, financial capacity and safety record and technical expertise necessary to deliver a project of this size and complexity. The qualified teams were then invited to respond to a request for proposals based on the city's bridging documents and contract terms. Three proposals were received and publicly opened. Alton Construction, in partnership with PBK Architects, submitted the lowest responsive responsible bid amongst the approved design build entities. Staff reviewed Alton's proposal, confirmed its responsiveness and qualifications, and received no bid protests. So therefore, for those reasons, staff recommends that council adopt the resolution awarding the design-build contract to Alta Construction in the amount of $51,573,911 and authorize the city manager to execute the agreement. Two things about this number. You might notice it is slightly more than what was shown on the previous page. That's because we based the award off of the base bid. This number includes ad alternates. Essentially, if we didn't, if this came in over our budget, we were willing to make some cuts to get it back on their budget. The other thing about the number you may have noticed is it's below the 55 million threshold, so we have plenty of room and bandwidth to add back those items. They include additional ballistic protection, some daylighting devices to allow natural light into the heart of the facility for well-being, and it's kind of a fancy fire protection system to protect all our data and servers and things like that in the event of a fire so they don't get destroyed. with water. So that's the method behind the procurement and the numbers. And just before I close out here, this was a huge effort. I came in here in 2024 and I've had the pleasure of working with so many fantastic staff and people across the board. So I just want to a big thank you to our police and fire departments, public works staff who assisted me every day through this. Our planning department, Andrew Tripple, was fantastic with Mike Janicek getting this through all our entitlements. Our finance team, our legal team, we had to pretty much rewrite the entire contract, which was, you know, no easy ordeal. So me and Dylan had plenty of early mornings working together going through that. I also want to thank our city manager's office, all our consultant teams, our planning commission, city council for the guidance and direction on the design, and the members of the public who brought the project to this point and made it possible. So tonight's action Just before I close, tonight's action is significant. It moves the city from planning, talking about dreaming, hoping, wishing we had a public safety facility to actually delivering one. In about 12 months' time, it's going to look very different out there at the fairgrounds. You're going to see walls stood up, a roof going on this building. And in basically two years from today, we should be having a ribbon cutting. So it's a pretty exciting time. So I'll be here to answer any questions that come up. And I have these two great channel members beside me as well. And I'm sure you guys will help out where needed. So thank you.

Thank you very much. Great presentation. Generational project. It's a fun one to have under our belt. Chiefs, anything to add to this point? Thank you. Council, any questions? Seeing none, let's go to public comment.

We have not received any comments ahead of the meeting on this item. We do have eight attendees online. At this time, I will start at 30-second clock. During these 30 seconds, members of the public attending in person should bring their speaker cards to my desk. Members of the public attending online should raise their virtual hand. Those attending via phone should press star 9 to raise their hand. A speaker request received after this time may not be accommodated.

So following our practice, I will ask the clerk, any hands up?

No hands up, just one card.

Thank you. So our speaker tonight, Mack Thompson, it's yours for three minutes.

All right. Thank you. It's really nice to see you all. Nice to be here tonight. And my name is Mack Thompson. I'm the union president for the Petaluma Firefighters Local 1415. I've been an employee here in Petaluma Firefighter for 19 years. And actually, my first month of working here, I was asked to paint shovels gold to break ground for the Casa Grande Hotel site. And that was exciting. We had a plot of land, and that was also a dream. But right now, we have all done the work. And I'm here tonight to really acknowledge how much work has been put into this and how much pride I see from all of us in getting to where we are today. I know we still have a lot of work to do and excited about that work to come. But really acknowledging the incredible leadership of the City Manager Flynn and the Assistant City Manager Cochran, the entire City Council, City staff, and all of the layers of community involvement with the Planning Commission and different different community members involved, but also the incredible leadership of Chief Schock and Chief Miller and my fellow firefighters and police officers and public safety that are here to serve. The amount of work that goes into this is incredible and takes all of us. And in talking to all of you about this project, I know that there's a pride in this, but it also is personal and something that we all take. We all look at it as something that we really care about. And that is that is unique. I think that being a a labor leader in this community knowing that we are able to support this city and to feel supported by this council and by the leadership of this city is an incredible feeling and it's really exciting. So, I just wanted to come here to acknowledge all of the teamwork and really acknowledge how far we've come and look at the horizon and thank you all for all of your work. So, thank you.

And thank you. And with that, that closes public comment on the item. Bring it back to council. Any comments? Council member now.

Well, a little deja vu because I was there 20 years ago when those gold shovels were being painted. And I wasn't 100% supportive of that project because I wanted a new police station and I wanted a fire station. And I knew we had a location perfect for it on that corner of the fairgrounds parking lot. So do we have a groundbreaking ceremony date, Chiefs? I'm ready for that gold shovel again.

One of the staples. Anyway, I have to... I'm excited to see the plaque with all of your names on it on the side of the door. We have to get re-elected.

Anyway, thank you to staff for doing this because this is... I've been advocating for this for... before I ran for council 20 years ago. So thank you so much. And it's going to be so important to our community going forward and for generations. So thank you.

Council Member Shribbs.

Yeah, this is a true milestone. And so with that, I'd like to just move the item. Let's move forward.

Okay.

Note motion by Shribbs. Council Member Barnicle. I'll second the motion. I also just want to say September 29, 2007, 6,854 days ago was when we broke ground on the last attempt at this. So you are right. It is very personal. It's the stuff we don't want to let continue to get kicked down the road. I also just want to note that a few things that we did on this, there were so many people that came together to focus on doing something big, and that's what happens when we're all one team as a city. And I just really respect the city manager's office, the city attorney's office, all of the leaders, the labor leaders, the chiefs, everybody who's come together to support this project, because it really is a full team effort. And then the other thing is we had to do something differently to get it done, right? We moved to a design-build contract. And I just think, as a city, we have to not be so set in our ways of, like, what's the municipal code saying? What does our charter say? And think about ways that we can buck it sometimes to get something done because that's ultimately why we're elected. That's why we all want to work in public service is to get shit done. And so I just appreciate that we that we did that, that we thought outside the box. And now we're moving forward with what is truly a generational project. And I would be remiss to not say with all these folks here is that we've got to focus on revenue because this stuff all costs money and we just need to continue to. increase our property tax base grow our sales tax base grow all the different ways that we fund all this important work because our city's this is going to be here to to support our city you know 50 100 years out and that's going to require revenue so thank you council member gator thompson i don't really have anything to add except i hope those um shovels are ready and um

that's it. I mean, this is great. I mean, this has been, I mean, for me, I've always wanted it at the fairgrounds and it's probably been two plus decades and I'm gonna be alive to see it happen. And so, you know, when you start gauging things by your age, it's kind of exciting to see how things actually come about. You might have a vision, and it could be on any project, and it just takes a lot of time, and this is coming at the perfect time with everything that we're doing at the fairgrounds. It's centrally located, and I think we have the community's support on this. Thank you. Certainly the council's support, I hope.

Vice Mayor.

Just a quick question for Mac. I'm just wondering how the gold paint held up on those shovels, if we can reuse them. But, you know, otherwise, though, we want to give police and fire the best that we can, and so looking forward to that. Thank you.

And I just want to note to Paul, I mean, thanks for being the point man on this. And I know that success comes from following the schedule. The staff report says spring. I heard mid-2028 tonight. I'm thinking, if we stay on schedule, we stay on budget, and we get it built. And we're all excited for get it built part. So with that, we have a motion and a second from Shribs and Barnacle. And I'd like a roll call vote.

Barnacle?

Aye.

Cater Thompson? Yes. DeCarli?

Yes.

Now? Yes. Shrips? Yes. McDonald? Yes. Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you. Congratulations. Okay, moving on. Our next order of business is Resolutions Ordering Abatement of Nuisances Consisting of Hazardous Vegetation Rubbish Growing on Public and Private Property and Ordering the Fire Department to Abate Such Hazardous Vegetation and Rubbish. And helping us with this today is Amy Sege. Sege. Sege. Sege. Thank you very much for being here. You're our fire marshal, and the floor is yours.

Thank you very much. Well, it's a tough act to follow, but good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council, City Manager, and staff, as well as our community. Before you tonight is our second hazardous vegetation abatement hearing for the 2026 season. This hearing covers just two additional properties identified after our initial hearing that continued to present a wildfire risk. Staff has completed all noticing requirements and provided the property owners multiple opportunities to voluntarily abate the hazard. We are requesting adoption of the resolution authorizing the city to proceed with abatement only if the properties remain out of compliance after the established deadline, and I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

Thank you very much. Any questions? Council Member Shribbs.

Yeah, in the report, it seemed like there was a possible suggestion that is it really worth doing this whole process? Because there's only two properties that really need abatement, and the cost of doing those two is less than the actual cost of the program. So there's a benefit-cost ratio here that was implied as maybe worthwhile or not, but I see this as a possible good thing that it's working. Because it being it's working, people are complying. So I just want to just bring that up, that it is such a good program, that it's been very cost-effective, and that was only a couple properties available. Is there any comments you'd like to make on how that program, how you feel the program is working, and is it worth continuing this effort? So I'd just like to hear you talk about it a little bit.

Sure, it is a very laborious process for fire prevention staff to we have, you know, as you're aware, our initial list is quite lengthy. There are a lot of parcels that have been identified over the years as regularly out of compliance with our weed abatement or hazardous vegetation program. That being said, it's an important step that we take. As we all know, the risk of wildfire in our community is real and present and only seeming to get worse every year. And so we've taken additional steps this year, including more staff time, making personal calls to every single property that was being considered wildfire. to be sent for city abatement which resulted in a lot of additional voluntary compliance and so that's a plan that will continue i'm proud that we only have nine properties we've sent to city abatement thus far this year which is greatly reduced from years past and so Our program is working. Our community is becoming more and more aware of the risk. I think there is, with the amount of reports that we get from concerned residents and citizens asking us to look at this property or that property for abatement, I think the concern is high, and it's important that we respond to those concerns.

Good. Thank you. And the next question would be compared to, because you also inspect buildings as well as open areas. So how does that compare? Looking at buildings and the amount of effort put there and the amount of safety that that generates versus from wildfires. So can you do a comparison between the two at all in cost, time, value, or increase in safety?

Sure. Our fire inspectors do mostly building inspections all year round for general fire and life safety, as well as our CUPA hazardous materials safety and compliance. That's most of what we do. Our weed abatement focus really ramps up in May, June, July, and continuing through those hotter months. So it's a more concentrated effort. where we truly look at vacant parcels under a stricter lens that don't contain buildings. Most of what we do is focus on building inspections throughout the year. So this is a concentrated effort during the high fire season, which we know is continuing to expand to more of a year-long issue. But during those hot summer months when the rains have ceased and we're starting to get those tall, high grasses, that's really where we need to look at, especially where our wild and urban interface interacts with the edges of our community and where fire might take hold and spread if we were to have a wildfire threaten our borders. So it's as far as the effort, that's kind of what I'd say. It's more of a month, a shorter month focus for our weed abatement program versus our annual fire building inspections.

Good. And then to save any time and money, is any worthwhile properties we could take off the list instead of keeping them on the list?

Yes, we have been taking parcels off of the list, especially folks who reach out to us and say, hey, I've been doing a really good job with my property. Come and take a look at it this year. If they have been compliant, we will remove them from the list. So we don't want to just see it continuing to expand. We do want to take properties off, especially we've had properties, parcels on the list that have since been developed. It no longer really applies to a highly concentrated residential area. There are certain cases where that's true, and we work with code enforcement on those, but we are trying to shorten that list. It has gotten quite long.

Thank you. Other questions? No other questions. Let's go to general public or public comment on the item.

Uh, we did not receive any comments ahead of the meeting and we have 7 attendees on zoom at this time. I will start a 32nd clock during these 30 seconds members of the public attending in person should bring their speaker cards to the clerk's desk members of the public attending online should raise their virtual hand and those attending via phone should press star 9 to raise their hand speaker request received after this time may not be accommodated. And we do not have any hands raised, and I have not received any cards.

Okay. Then that closes public comment on the item and back up the council. And Council Member Shribbs?

I'd like to move the item. Second.

We have a second from Gator Thompson. And a motion from Shribbs. And a roll call vote, please. Barnacle I Peter Thompson yes yes to Carly yes now yes trips yes McDonald yes and much thank you very much for being here tonight the motion passed thank you our next item is a resolutions confirming the annual engineers report and ordering the levy and collection of assessments within the city landscape assessment districts for the year 26, 27. And to help us with that, we have Delana Bradford, our senior management analyst.

Amen.

Well, there's nothing better than a room full of people waiting for you to get something online.

We have...

Yes, please.

All right, here we go. Good evening, mayor, council members, and community. Tonight, we are providing an update on the city's landscape assessment districts, or LADs. LADs are one of those local government topics that sounds simple at first, landscaping, maintenance neighborhood improvements, and then very quickly becomes parcel boundaries, assessment rates, service levels, fund balances, and enough spreadsheets to make even a committed Excel user reconsider their life choices. But at the core, this work is about something very visible and very important, maintaining the shared landscapes that help shape the character of Petaluma neighborhoods. These districts help fund landscaping, trees, pathways, medians, irrigation systems, and other common areas residents see every day. When maintained well, they support neighborhood pride, walkability, shade, beautification, and the sense that our public spaces are being cared for. This slide outlines the four main reasons we are here tonight. First, this is the final step in the annual LAD process. Each year, the City Council reviews the districts, confirms assessments, and completes the required steps to continue maintenance services. Second, we are sharing what we learned through community outreach. Staff worked hard to reach property owners in several ways. And while we remain hopeful that someday every public notice will be read immediately and with great enthusiasm, we learned it helps to provide information in multiple formats. Third, fiscal year 27 represents a reset moment for the LAD program. The city has paid off the current program deficit associated with these districts, which allows us to reset the financial baseline and focus more clearly on current services, current costs, and what each district can realistically support. Lastly, we will discuss what comes next, a new petition-based pathway to higher service levels that puts our community members in the driver's seat. forward-thinking irrigation improvements opportunities to work with our nonprofit partners and continue to asset documentation to prepare for a comprehensive capital assessment so tonight is both a closeout point and a starting point. Over late 2025 and early 2026, staff conducted a comprehensive outreach campaign to 1,121 parcel owners. Outreach included district webpages, FAQs, postcards, door hangers, webinars, YouTube videos, emails, council presentations, and surveys. The goal was to provide multiple ways for property owners to learn about landscape assessment districts, how they are funded, the services they provide, and why the city is discussing them now. Participation was admittedly limited. Across the 1,121 parcels, there were 83 webinar attendees, 73 survey responses, and 202 YouTube views. These results show that while the city successfully reached many residents, not every property owner chose to participate. We did find that this was a common outcome for technical topics such as assessment districts. The outreach also confirmed that district priorities vary. Some neighborhoods support higher service levels and are willing to consider increased assessments, while others prefer to maintain current service levels and avoid additional costs. Based on this feedback, staff refined the program to focus on a petition-based pathway. Districts with demonstrated property owner interests can pursue higher service levels through the Proposition 218 process, while districts without clear support are not required to do so. This approach creates a path for improvement that is driven by property owner interest rather than imposed citywide. This slide groups the districts into three categories based on anticipated service reductions, highest, high, and moderate. The key takeaway is that the districts are not all in the same financial position. Some face immediate challenges because maintenance costs are outpacing available revenue, while others remain more stable but require ongoing monitoring. The highest risk districts have the largest funding gaps, and in most cases, no annual inflator to keep pace with rising costs. These districts are expected to see significant service reductions in fiscal year 27. The high and moderate risk districts generally have annual inflators, but those increases are not keeping pace with actual costs. While service reductions are expected to be less severe, they are likely still noticeable. This risk-based approach helps staff prioritize resources where financial concerns are greatest while planning proactively for districts that remain sustainable today but could face challenges in the future. In short, this slide is the fiscal weather report for the LADs. Some areas are partly cloudy, some are stormier, and a few districts may just need us to check the roof before it rains. So, you want a nicer neighborhood? Good. This slide is for you. The key point is that higher service levels require both district interest and parcel owner approval. The city cannot increase assessments or services on its own. The process begins with a property owner request, ensuring the effort is community driven. Next, a petition signed by at least 25% of parcel owners demonstrates sufficient interest before additional work begins. Because the cost of the Proposition 218 process is paid by the district, this threshold helps ensure resources are invested where there is a strong likelihood of success. Once the threshold is met, staff prepares a preliminary scope and cost estimate based on the improvements requested such as enhanced maintenance, irrigation repairs, tree work, or general beautification. An engineer's analysis then evaluates the proposed assessment, property benefits, and assessment structure. The district then proceeds through the Proposition 218 ballot process, where property owners decide whether to approve the increased assessment. If approved, the enhanced service level is implemented. If not, the district remains at its current service level. This process provides neighborhoods with a clear, property-owner-driven path to higher service levels. For districts that are ready to begin, the petition is now available at cityofpetaluma.org forward slash LADs. Through the outreach process, many property owners expressed concern about long-standing deficits that had accumulated in their districts. In response, the City is eliminating approximately 768,000 in accumulated LAD program deficits. This gives each district a clean financial starting point, allowing future discussions to focus on current service levels, current costs, and what each district can realistically support, rather than past shortfalls. While eliminating deficit will not immediately improve landscaping, it creates the financial foundation needed to move the program forward. With this reset, the focus shifts to three priorities. Maintaining appropriate service levels, managing rising costs for labor, fuel, water, materials, and contracted services, and investing in visible improvements such as healthy landscaping, irrigation repairs, weed control, and plant replacement. It is important to note that eliminating the deficit does not create new ongoing funding. Each district must still operate with its available assessment revenue unless property owners choose to support a higher level of service through the Proposition 218 process. Fiscal Year 27 is not a cure-all, but it does provide a fresh start for the LAD program. This slide outlines the next phase of work. First, modernizing irrigation systems. Rather than simply replacing existing equipment, staff will prioritize water efficient technology and improvements that support the long-term health of the city's urban canopy, especially during times of drought. Second, expanding our nonprofit partnerships to help enhance landscaping, shade, beautification, and climate resilience while stretching our limited resources. Third, preparing for a comprehensive capital assessment by documenting LED assets, including irrigation infrastructure, trees, plantings, pathways, medians, and other maintained features. Together, these efforts move the program from financial reset to long-term strategy by improving infrastructure, building partnerships, and creating the asset data needed for informed future planning. The LAD program is entering a new chapter. By eliminating the accumulated deficit, the City is providing a clean financial foundation for the future. Staff has completed extensive outreach, gathered community feedback, identified district risk levels, and established a clear, property owner-driven pathway for districts that wish to pursue higher service levels. For the first time, interested neighborhoods now have a clear roadmap to shape the future of their district through the petition process. Rather than a one-size-fits-all approach, communities that are ready to invest in enhanced landscaping and neighborhood improvements can choose to move that conversation forward. Before that work can continue, staff recommends that the council approve the fiscal year 27 LAD assessments, ensuring each district can continue operating within its available revenues while these long-term improvements move forward. This effort is about protecting neighborhood investments, improving transparency, and building a more sustainable, responsive, and community-driven LAD program. Thank you, and we are happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Appreciate you bringing the item back to us. Any questions up here from the dais? I guess I have a question. Councillor Mercator-Thompson.

On the slide, there were areas that are not part of the landscape district mentioned. So are we talking about reducing those services also, existing that are not connected to this program?

We are only talking about parts of the neighborhoods that are included in the LED program. Nothing else.

Okay. I didn't know the Park Place neighborhood was included in an assessment district. Is it?

Park Place is one of our districts. So there are areas within Park Place that are a part of the assessment district, but the entirety of the subdivision would not be in the districts.

Thank you. Council Member Shribbs?

Yeah, so one of the only concerns I had for the whole program, I'd like the way it's set up that it's initiated now by the petition process. But in the report, it did mention that it would have to go through this pretty long process here. And one of the steps was an engineering report and then getting the petitions. And there was a price tag put on it, $7,000 to like $25,000 of staff time to do this. In many of these LADs, the total cost for the whole annual care is a lot less than that. So we're talking it would take five years of current payments to even pay for the study to raise the price even a few dollars. Is there any way we can reduce that down or simplify it so the folks in each of these LEDs know that if they start this process, it can be completed. It'd still be financially balanced between dollars in and services obtained.

One of the challenges with the Prop 218 process is the necessity to have a special versus general benefit analysis completed. And so depending on the complexities of any given district, that's where the majority of that cost comes from. So if you have a smaller district that has, you know, 20 parcels in it, that's a much easier assessment to do than a district that has 445 parcels in it. So the primary cost driver of that is the complexity of determining what elements will be within that district and then how each parcel owner benefits from those assets within that district. So there's a cost that cannot be avoided in that, but the long-term benefits of going through that analysis and setting these districts up now so that they can be successful for the next 30 years is worth that cost. The path that we're on right now, if districts do not choose to go through the Prop 218, will be continuing diminished returns. They will see less and less and less service because the costs are not going to go down. But if we don't increase those assessments, the service level has to go along with those set assessments.

Right so anyway, I'm hoping that folks will wake up and realize we'll put a little bit more money in to get the service that we really need down long term and they'll start this whole process up. Now that we've got this pretty well completed, given that we have like close to 50 LADs now, we've learned a lot about this process and the legal requirements and all that. In the future should we look at LEDs as a really a way to go or should we think about different ways of doing HOAs or even just city park is making part of the city parking and taking care of it that way so do you have any opinions now they've gone through this process.

I think both for the city of Petaluma and several cities across the state of California, we've learned the fallacies of landscape assessment districts. If I had the key to the city, I would never write another one. There are other similar cost sharing mechanisms that exist. We do have a community facilities district at Riverfront that appears at this point to be a much stronger financial program for making sure that our community stays safe, clean, you know, all of the things that we were hopeful that LEDs would do. But they do provide a stronger roadmap than all of the concerns that have been raised with LEDs over the past 30 years.

Thank you.

That's all the questions I have. I think I had a couple and a couple opinions too. I think that the finance districts you talk about, I think they just, their LADs, they just incorporated all the better lessons we learned so that we don't get burned on finance. And I think we find that in any kind of sprawl subdivision development is that we don't have enough money later. The property taxes don't generate enough to cover services, which is why they took the landscaping out of the property tax and put it back on the owner. And then that's not even turning out that well. But ones we do today, like in many industries, we've learned the lessons of the past. I'm okay with this raise. I appreciate that you raised every LAD to the maximum, and that turned out to be about 15% increase on everybody. But then I appreciate that you showed the slide that showed those first 10. They don't have enough money in them to do the service they get today. So I asked in the questions, did we send them a letter saying your landscape assessment district will look worse next year? Is that a direct letter we sent?

That letter hasn't been sent, but it is being drafted. So community members can look forward to those letters, and there'll be different iterations of those letters because each of those 42 active districts have different circumstances. So some of them will not see a reduction in their services.

Just that first group. That first group's going to see it's going to be really a lot worse. The middle group will say it's a little bit worse, and the bottom group is just right. Yes. But that's the answer for the 218 here at 15 to 25,000 per group. I see a tremendous public backlash to us telling them that they need to put together upfront money into this. And, you know, a lot of assessment district work is done on distributed over property tax over a longer period and stuff like this. But the shock value of $15,000 to $25,000 just to get it, you know, to pay you another $50 a month or $100 a month per parcel, that shock value, like you're noting, we're going to be revisiting this issue with very unhappy people because either it'll all have fallen to brown and weeds or they're going to pay $25,000. I don't envy that PR campaign, and I know it will end up here. I think We need to drive them to the table, but to people to know that their landscaping, their neighborhood values are dropping because of this. And I think that's what the comment we'll hear is the neighborhood value is dropping. But I think we also need to figure out How about rock solid to eighteen is can we do a citywide de minimis if if if it's less than a hundred dollars per year can we do a one action without a new can we do a drive through and say if if if there are no new developments in this subdivision and it's a complete subdivision from twenty five years ago. Can we assume that there's no basic difference in the benefit nature? You know, can we cut out that whole? Anything you can do to knock that $25,000 down to something that won't get us shot or you shot would be really helpful. Because I see this as a real pending problem. But I'm really glad you got this year to its maximum levels for every group. And I'd like to ask the clerk if there are any comments, public comments.

We did not receive any comments ahead of the meeting. We do have nine people in the zoom still at this time. I will start a 32nd clock during these 30 seconds. Members of the public attending in person should bring their speaker cards to my desk. Members of the public attending online should raise their virtual hand and those attending via phone should press star nine to raise their hand. Speaker request received after this time may not be accommodated. And I have not received any cards, and I do not see any raised hands.

Thank you very much. That will close public comments on the item. And that brings us to council motions. And there are a number of them. And if we are ready for voting on this, then I'd like a motion for the no recusal resolution. So moved. Thank you. Motion by Barnacle? Second. Second by DeCarli. And for the no recusals, we have a roll call vote.

Barnacle?

Aye.

Cater Thompson? Yes. DeCarli?

Yes.

Now?

Yes.

Shrives? Yes. McDonald?

Yes.

Motion carries unanimously.

All right. I'll be recusing the next one because I looked too close.

And we'll see a series of recusals based on council members living in the proximity with where they need to recuse. So this is the, I'd like a motion for the resolution with Barnacle recusing.

I'll second.

Then we have a motion by Cater Thompson, a second by now, and roll call vote, please.

Barnacle recused cater Thompson. Yes to Carly yes, now, yes, troops, yes, McDonald, yes. Motion carries unanimously.

Let's invite council member Barnacle back and ask the vice mayor to Carly to weigh in. I'll be refusing for where I live too. Thank you make the motion saying we have a motion by cater comes in a second by now roll call vote.

Barnacle. Hi cater Thompson yes. To currently recused now yeah. Shrimps yes, mcdonald yes, motion carries unanimously wonderful and let's invite council member shreds.

To announce refusal and I'm not refusing because I live in the same neighborhood as the same change the states.

I'll move that I can second that.

We have a motion by now in a second by catered Thompson and we have a roll call vote particle all right catered Thompson yes to Carly yes now yes trips is recused and McDonnell yes we invite accounts thank you and we invite council members shreds back and I'll be leaving for much the same reasons

And I'll make motion all right so now we're looking at the areas that may McDonald's affected by and motion by councilman cater Thompson of the second second by councilman now. Roll call vote please particle hi.

Gator Thompson yes to Carly yes now yes shrimps yes and McDonald recused motion carries unanimously invite the mayor back into the room.

Do we need to do one for the quent recused, or can we assume that that's part of the no recuses? Okay.

So I'll make the motion on five. We don't need to.

All right, let me defer to the clerk here and ask, have we covered all the resolutions needed?

I'm thinking it would be safer just to include the Quint one right now.

Let's do one more, unless you guys want to just assume that first one was...

So I'm looking for a motion for Council Member Quint.

I'll make a motion for attachment by resolution. Second.

So we have a motion by Cater Thompson and a second by Barnacle. And a roll call vote, please.

at Barnacle I cater Thompson yes to Carly yes now yes James make McDonald yes okay motion carries and say thank you all right well thank you very much and that's always an adventure appreciate the presentation yeah

And now we have our workshop for the evening. And thank you all for allowing the lineup change in this to bring this one as the main event for the evening at this time. It's a recommendation to the City of Petaluma Council to receive staff presentation, public comment, and conduct a workshop concerning the Petaluma North Smart Station Priority Development Area and specific plan proposed vision and preparation of the specific plan associated environmental impact report. And leading this august team is Tom Ford, Principal Planner, and Andrew Tripple, Planning Manager. And this may take a second to get all the microphones and computers in the right place and let us know when you're ready.

Thank you.

No, if it's agreeable to the group, we might take an adjournment for five minutes and give the team a chance to pull it together here. And so, Madam Clerk, will you put us in adjournment for five minutes? Okay, we are back in session now, and we are about to start our conversation on the Petaluma North Smart Station Priority Development Area Specific Plan Proposal in the form of a workshop. That's us.

Welcome team. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members. We're really happy to be here tonight and share the vision that we have for the specific plan area. I'm Tom Ford. I'm the project manager on behalf of the city, and I'm joined by Annie Ryan, our consultant from Perkins & Will, who's the lead designer on a lot of what you're going to see. When we sent out the staff report last week, we had attachment 6, which was 60 slides and this afternoon we decided to condense it a little bit. So we went through and we did 2 things. We did some things out to make it not that they were superfluous, but that they were. PERHAPS NOT NEEDED. AND THEN WE ALSO TOOK A LAND USE DISCUSSION THAT'S MORE ABOUT IMPLEMENTATION AFTER WE RECEIVE GO AHEAD FROM YOU FOLKS ON THE VISION. WE HAVE THOSE SLIDES BUT WE'LL PAUSE AT THE END OF THE WE'VE NOW SHORTENED IT TO 40 AND WHEN WE GET TO THAT WE'LL PAUSE IT AND IF YOU WANT TO SEE THOSE LATER DURING YOUR DISCUSSION WE CAN BRING THEM UP. So I'll be brief. I just have a very quick overview and then I'm going to turn it over to Annie. I want to just talk about the specific plan background, what we've done to date. Then we'll have Annie's presentation and then with public comment you guys can have a discussion. Hopefully we can leave here tonight with either the vision we're bringing to you or your thoughts on how we might amend that vision. So the specific plan area is about 1,060 acres from Washington Street all the way up to about where the brewery is. I usually know the name of that. Yes. Lagunitas. And on the other side of McGow, it's Scott Street. So it goes all the way up there. And then in the middle, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has identified a half-mile radius that they call the TOC, the Transit Oriented Communities Area. So there's some pretty focused policies that need to be put in place for that area specifically, but then also for the entire specific plan. Looking at it from the citywide, you can see that it's somewhat remote in that it's across a freeway, it's across a river, and it's on the other side of town. And that's adjacent to your other PDA, Priority Development Area, as identified by MTC. And you'll be having a separate planning effort for that very soon. Where we are in the process, we're just a little bit behind. We are exactly where the red arrow is. We're trying to get, we're in that knuckle between developing all of the options and alternatives and thoughts and coming to you folks with what we think our preferred vision is. We want to see if you can either bless it or amend it and then we'll go forward and Perkins and Will will go off and write a specific plan. They have a consultant that works for them that'll start to do the CEQA documentation and we'll be back in the fall with a draft plan. So our goals are to implement the pending general plan, implement Metropolitan Transportation Commission policies for that transit-oriented communities area, to create a unique identity and sense of place. And we've heard a lot from the community about what they think about what the sense of place is now and how ideas they have for changing it. And then the last piece is that once the specific plan gets written as in place, it will create the regulatory structure that you can then implement development, implement public improvements, and start to see change over the 20-year course of the specific plan horizon. Planning process to date, we did a pretty extensive existing conditions analysis. We had a lot of stakeholder interviews and outreach to community members. With community workshops and such and using the stakeholder information we've developed with Perkins and Willis, developed a vision, some ideas about land use and improving circulation networks. We had a planning commission session. We gave detailed reporting on that in the staff report. So the community engagement has been pretty robust to date. In addition to some focus group meetings at the very beginning, we met with city staff on December 4th. The leaders of city staff, like Public Works, a lot of people to get a lot of ideas about what we can do about flooding, what we can do about traffic, things like that. We had the community open house on December 10th. And then we also had pop-up workshops, LumaCon, such as that. And then back at the community center on March 21st, we had a community workshop where Perkins and Will led exercises with people to really small group exercises to look at how we might think about the vision for what is identified in the staff report as the focus areas. In addition to that, we were here in November to speak with you about a community outreach partners working group. That working group was assembled largely along the lines that you gave direction on. It has about 15 members. We've had three meetings and the fourth one is going to be next Monday to incorporate what we hear from you tonight and give Perkins and Will some additional ideas. So recently you hired a new economic development director and that person put on her hat and really went out to the community and sort of dug down a little deeper than we had already gotten with some of the outreach and really started talking to some of the business owners and businesses out there and came away with some takeaways. These are discussed in the staff report and they're on the screen right now. And so then, as we said in the staff report, we narrowed it down to seven things that we'd like you to give us direction on, if possible. A couple of planning efforts that we'd like to sunset, just because we feel like this specific plan happening in 2026, 2027 will enable us to update the planning area for those. We want you to think about taking the MTC assigned plan area and converting it slightly to adopt to the Measure Y boundaries that were for the unincorporated part of the land north of Corona Road. And then we also want to see, Andy's got a lot of material to show you, if we're on track with what we see as these focused development planning in the three focus areas, the transit village, the health district, and the McDowell corridor. and then put in place bold urban design policies and a framework for really placemaking and community building tools. And lastly, if you can approve the vision or amend it in whatever way you please after discussion, we'd like to go away and prepare the specific plan, bring that back in about in the fall as a draft, with a draft EIR. And with that, I'm going to turn it over to Annie. Like I said, she'll go through most of the slides, and then we'll get to a stopping point. And if you want to see more, we'll bring it up later.

Thanks, Tom. Hi, everyone. I'm Annie Ryan. I'm an urban designer with Perkins and Will. It's nice to be here with you all this evening. I am going to try to be quick, but we can talk about all of this in as much detail as you would like after. I'm going to start with some context, and then we'll talk a little bit about engagement, what we've heard, what we're hearing, and then I'll move into the proposed vision. So just a little orientation. As Tom said, it's about 1000 acres. We've got some key boundaries established by 101, Corona Road, Washington Boulevard, Maria Drive. And it's sort of it's you can really see the shape, right? It's sort of it balloons out around the station area. So it's capturing this half mile transit area. And then this entire corridor, it's about two miles that runs all the way down North McDowell to get to Washington. And I think it's important to note some features here, because these become drivers of the plan and how we think about the east side. So there's, I said, there's 101, there's the Petaluma River, there's the Smart Line. And these are all connectors in their own right, but they also are barriers. And these are big pieces of infrastructure or geographic features that can be crossed, but with great challenge, or sometimes not crossed at all. And so I think it's important to just sort of take this in as we think about the east side, how people experience it today, and also how it's sort of perceived in overall Petaluma. So what's happening in the Plain Area today? It's a pretty remarkable place. This is a very unique part of the city. There's a lot of existing assets here. You know, we start with the Smart Station, the Smart Pathway. These are tremendous assets, huge economic potential and investments that the city has made. There are some really well-defined, really well sort of understood neighborhoods here that provide homes to really wide diversity of people. several manufactured home neighborhoods that are just vital sources of affordable housing, especially for our seniors. There are open spaces, creeks, trails throughout the Plain area, including the very beloved Lynch Creek Trail. These are really great assets. We don't find these very often in cities around the Bay Area. And there's also, I just want to point out these sort of what we're calling vital community resources. So we've got Petaluma Valley Hospital, the Petaluma Health Center. These are really critical sources of service, not just for the east side, of course, not just for Petaluma, but at a regional stage. So these are really important assets to point out. And, you know, when we think just about the business, the commercial side of the East Side, I mean, there's a really, really rich legacy of local entrepreneurship here. Small businesses that have gone very global. I mean, Lagunitas is like, of course, a well-known example. But there's so many different industries and businesses that have sort of taken root here. The name Maker's Alley is getting used. You know, there's a real sense of place here that I think this plan is well equipped to help see forward to the next many decades. And I just want to underpin, too, that, you know, this is a real job center. There's a lot of important jobs that happen here. And so this plan needs to be very, very cognizant of how it doesn't disrupt, dismantle that, and really finds a way to continue to be an important job center for the city and for the region. The east side, you know, many, many great things, but it's not without its challenges. This is an exhibit from the pending general plan update. The areas you see in pink are what are referred to as equity priority areas. So as defined in the general plan, these are areas comprised of lower income residents, that are disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other negative health impacts. So you can see, I mean, it's quite clear, right? A huge amount of that category of area falls within our plan area. So for any kind of planning effort here, we really need to be thinking about this at the forefront. It's not just business as usual. This is a planning opportunity to repair real harm that's occurring in the plan area today. So whether it's higher pollution rates due to the proximity of 101, or high concentrations of seniors that are living in areas that experience a lot of flooding or have sort of traffic and roadway issues, roadway safety issues, equity has to be a major driver for this plan. So I wanted to just, you know, we can't walk through the plan right now, but maybe we can kind of quickly all do this together on screen virtually to sort of just get our minds in place and think about this place a little bit. So there's a lot of amazing things happening, right? We have the new smart station, the pathway. I mean, these are tremendous assets. getting more and more popular every day. So much connection to nature. I mean, the parks are really, it's so fun how they all have different characters. I mean, I was really, I'm not from Petaluma, but I really have loved getting to know this area because I just find it so tremendous, all these different types of open spaces that weave throughout the neighborhoods. These diverse businesses, it's so interesting to see the variety and how they all have stories. And we've gotten to connect with a lot of people at workshops and hear about sort of what these businesses mean to them and what they mean to their families in Petaluma. And there are some serious challenges. And I would just say the constant refrain we hear is about safety on our streets and in our public realm. The road quality is not conducive to pedestrian trips, to bicycle trips. All of you, I'm sure, probably know this intersection very well. I mean, these are serious hardships. And so when we're talking about transit-oriented development, we have to think about an environment that is actually encouraging people safely to use that transit. And, you know, I just want to point out, like, it's all ages. When we're talking about this type of infrastructure, we're thinking about kids, we're thinking about people pushing strollers, elderly folks. Like, when we design for all ages, that's where we see sort of our safest, greatest outcomes on our streets. There's some really interesting and important environmental features here, right? So we have creeks that are running all the way through. They go through sort of various stages of naturalization to what you're seeing on the left, like very culverted and sort of engineered. Pretty significant flooding issues that are a constant refrain as well. We've heard a lot from Public Works about the flooding challenges, but residents and business owners as well. And then also just want to flag, you know, the heightened wildfire risk. One of the earlier presentations today was talking about that urban wildland interface. I mean, we are right on the front lines here in this plan area. So what did we hear? I mentioned this, but I would say like the biggest highlights really are around mobility, around people feeling safe to use, to get out of their cars and to be able to walk and bike and do so with their children as well. This sort of refrain, this constant refrain for wanting more green space, wanting more connection to nature, but also just wanting places where they can socialize and be with their families, be with friends, a place to meet up after work. You know, this is a residential area, but it's also a place where people come to work. And so having those types of spaces and places is really critical. I would say from all of that sort of feedback, we are seeing, we've sort of latched onto these four priorities, right? So this idea of really maximizing the station as a community asset, thinking about North McDowell as a place that puts people first, so not just something that you are driving through or moving through, but actually a place that can be a destination in its own right. Thinking about local industries sort of anchoring the place and really creating a strong sense of place where makers and breweries and all these sort of creative enterprises are really flourishing together. And then I would say, you know, thinking about nature and climate, it's got to be at the forefront. I mean, just thinking about why people want to live in Petaluma, it's because you can be sort of immersed in nature, but we can't control nature. And so thinking about how we do this in a sensible way and thinking long term is critical. And so with all of this feedback, we have sort of this emerging vision, which I can just read to you, a vision statement. So the Petaluma North Station-specific plan area will be a resilient, connected, and vibrant place where housing, jobs, and recreation come together in a walkable, nature-oriented district that supports health, community, and long-term economic resilience. It's about complete neighborhoods and distinctive mixed-use hubs that will offer homes, jobs, and daily amenities within a short walk or ride. Transit corridors that will be active and welcoming with art, public spaces, and human-scale development that supports ridership and car-optional living. Creeks and green streets that will form ecological spines, linking people to open spaces, managing water, cooling neighborhoods, and protecting from wildfire risk. And a thriving ecosystem of different businesses that will be supported by a mix of amenities that generate vibrancy and enable people to live near their work, school, and families. So these are all great, these are words, so we need to turn these into strategies that can inform a place. And so we start to think about design pillars. I'm an urban designer, so this is gonna get a little artsy, but we think about these pillars to kind of drive decisions about how we would think about things like land use. And so these pillars that we've latched onto are environmental resilience, circulation and access, and housing, economy, and place. And what could that start to look like? So when we think about a big picture urban design framework, I think there's three big ideas that we're trying to sort of bring to life here. The first one being distinct neighborhoods, so a really contextual mix of housing and jobs and everyday uses that are all sort of coalescing together and you really have a strong sense of place with that development. There needs to be a placefulness in how we think about these future development coming forward. Green stitches, which are this idea of bringing our creeks and parks and trails, all of these sort of moments of nature, having them work together so that they become places that are connecting the larger fabric, that they really can be the stitches that hold it all together. And then the circuits, which is what you see in orange or sort of the reddish color, these are what we're calling people priority routes. So these ideas of networks that are connecting all neighborhoods, no matter where you live on the east side, to transit, to open space and everyday uses. And it's going to use a combination of public streets, trails, connections between new development, all ways to get people around safely. And so I'll try to just kind of quickly walk through, like, what could this start to be as a specific plan? Like, if we think about taking these big picture sort of concepts and now translating them to standards and priorities, but ultimately standards and guidelines. And so when we think about environment and resilience, what we could imagine is establishing an overlay zone. whether it's for fire hazard or for flood hazard, sort of thinking through how development in these areas needs to be uniquely responsive to those conditions. We can think about our streets being multipurpose, so whether they're there to actually help buffer from fire spread. We can think about the spacing of trees, how placing trees can be wind buffers. But also flood management, so how we can start to think about our streets as being places that hold water, that slow it down. that recharge the aquifer. All of this can be multipurpose and multifunctional and can look really, really great as well. We can think about our open spaces being very multifunctional. So there's already this huge network of open spaces, but now we can start to think about potentially new open spaces in new parts of our plan area. So these are conceptual, but the idea is that we want to have a framework that we can build from. Circulation and access, you know, I talked about the mobility concerns, the safety concerns. It's all about creating a network that is human scale, that encourages people to walk. And wherever we are finding areas for new development, we're superimposing this walkable framework, first and foremost, so that we get an environment where people are feeling like they can live without their cars if that's what they choose to do. All of this has to be thought about in a way that preserves the integrity of the district. So what you see at number five, this idea of improved freight access in industrial and business park areas, this is directly relating to what we were hearing in that it echoes the feedback that was received in the memo from the business community that there's really important work that's happening here. And so when we think about safe streets, these are streets that have to work for many different users. Housing and economy in place, what do we mean when we think about land uses here? There has to be some context, some intention behind it. And what we've started to sort of coalesce around is this idea of character areas. So thinking about these sort of zones, or like smaller sub areas with the plan area, that could start to have their own unique character that's directly informed by the streets that sort of about them, but also the surrounding land uses. So I'll just sort of quickly walk through. But, you know, this idea of like a maker's alley where we're really focusing an intensive sort of effort to support the job support sort of industry there. The Corona Transit Village is is of course, the area right around the Smart Station. It includes quite a bit of unincorporated area that does not have a lot of development today. So we really need to be thinking about to develop there. What does that actually want to be and could that be? And then moving down McDowell, we, of course, have sort of the immediate station right at the heart of the station is what we're calling it. a sort of central zone in the middle. And then all the way at the bottom, we have what we're referring to as the community and health hubs, this idea of really creating a strong sense of purpose that is sort of anchored by the Lucchese complex, but also the hospital. So what could this look like? I'm just going to sort of splash some images on the screen, but this idea of a maker's alley that is really about bringing together places where people work, but also places where people can enjoy in what sort of interesting businesses and industries are occurring here, places that workers want to spend time at after work, places that you want to come to on the weekends, places that really celebrate the industries that make this area special. The station could be this very vibrant place that, you know, is capturing the fact that there are going to be so many people arriving by foot, by bike. So what could that sort of immediate sort of capture area start to feel like? Central McDowell could start to be a place that maybe has some interstitial moments, so ideas of sort of taking advantage of maybe larger setbacks, parcels that maybe are underutilized that could start to become places for smaller pockets of open spaces, places for rest, starting to think about how we sort of take advantage of these smaller moments as part of a larger system. And then lastly, the health and community hub, you know, this is really civic, a civic type of sub area where we have large convergence of people coming together, but also places that need to, you know, sort of support that larger population thinking about retail and such. So this is a very conceptual sort of land use plan that gives you a sense of how we could start to think about these types of land uses arraying in the plan area. So this focus on very walkable 15-minute neighborhood centers, of course, is something that comes straight from the general plan. So this is an opportunity to really see that through. Prioritizing the job centers as places of employment. Thinking about a diversity of housing options and especially thinking about housing that is really focused around transit. How can we maximize that transit asset and encourage as many people as possible to take advantage of it? And then thinking as well as just about sort of a full diversity of uses in areas where there is the greatest potential for change. So starting to identify opportunity sites. So just some sort of precedent imagery to kind of put some image to those words. And what I will try to sort of move through quickly now is just what does this actually start, like how could we start to do this, right? Like a specific plan, this is a very large area, it's 1,000 acres, so it's not about mass change. It's about really thinking through intentionally where the opportunities were. more change is potentially needed, and then where there are opportunity sites that maybe are underutilized or wanting to be something more. And many of these actually were raised as part of the general plan process. And so what we've brought here this evening are these sort of three focus areas, the first being the transit village, which is parcels right around the transit, the smart station, the health district, which I mentioned is sort of the area that captures sort of the zone around the Lucchese complex, but then specifically the shopping center across the street, an opportunity or a change area that was identified in the general plan. And then the segment of North McDowell, sort of the remainder in between, that captures a few sort of smaller opportunity sites along the street. So if we think about starting to translate sort of these higher level principles into land use strategies, we could look at something like this, what you see conceptually here. So we're imagining walkable blocks that start to connect the sort of new development in the unincorporated area that you see just sort of north of the station into the sort of larger fabric, right? Starting to connect with neighborhoods that are across Corona Road. We're thinking about a really diverse mix of uses, a mix of housing types in particular, so enabling a lot more affordability, more workforce housing, people able to live close to where they work, and always sort of thinking about how are we supporting transit, how are we enabling this station to be the asset that the city had sort of dreamed of when it was first announced that there could be a second smart station in Petaluma. And of course, thinking about active uses, how do we bring in open spaces? All of this is sort of coming together in a sort of complete sort of land use framework. Moving further down, this is sort of zoomed in around the health district. So thinking here about, you know, future connections that could be brought into the plan area that double, as I mentioned before, these sort of flood management streets that are sort of dual purpose, not just creating more walkability, but also improving our resilience areas. We're thinking about streetscape enhancements, of course, along North McDowell, just sort of overall improving the experience of that street. And then I want to just sort of focus your attention to what you see in the darker purple. So these are mixed use areas identified as change areas in the general plan. These land use designations, we are just sort of bringing from the general plan to this plan, but starting to think through how might these sort of land use blocks, these existing shop, one of them, the larger one, of course, is the existing shopping center. How can they start to be integrated with their surroundings? So if we think about sort of a green edge along the larger shopping center, like how can that start to be something that now connects to Lucchese Park? And then the last piece I want to talk about is that third area I mentioned, sort of the segment of North McDowell that is right in between the station and East Washington. And so really what's driving the change here, what we want to be thinking about is how do we just think about a street that works for everyone? How are we sort of balancing all these needs? Right now, it's a street, of course, that's very focused on vehicles, but we can think about bringing in these other users into the design of a future street that is not going to compromise the ability for all these other uses to coexist. That is really the beauty of really well-designed streets, is that they can balance and work for everyone. And so just to sort of remind ourselves, right, like we have these sort of five character areas that we've established around the plan area. And so these character areas can start to inform the qualities and experiences of these different segments of both North McDowell, but also Corona Road. So we can think about a design of a street that is responsive to the land uses that are on either side of it and how all of that can work. on the street itself without compromising things like level of service and its ability to work as a viable street. And so just to sort of conceptually give you a sense of this, this is an existing typical cross section for North McDowell. So you can see lots of space for vehicles. There's five travel lanes plus sort of a bus turnoff space. So a lot of distance that people are having to cross by foot if they're crossing this street. Very little planting or shade. So when you're walking along the sidewalk, it's a narrow sidewalk and it doesn't really have a lot of shelter from the elements. And then we've got sort of limited and uneven bike facilities. This particular cross section was cut where we have this sort of shared use path. It's really just a concrete band that sort of sits adjacent to the sidewalk. So not really giving much to most people, most users of the street. So how can we start to think about, you know, putting forward a new vision that sort of reprioritizes a little bit, redistributes things about everyone getting to benefit from this corridor? And so, you know, this is the logic, right, that we're really shifting the priorities from cars to people and really to the planet, thinking about how the street can be something that's going to live long term and be very viable in that way. So with that, I think these are rephrased versions of the key recommendations that Tom kicked us off with. And I think we can move to questions.

Okay. Great presentation. Thanks. I appreciate you cutting that slide count in half. I know that causes us to have many questions and things like this, but I think we got a good gist of it there. And who on council has a question they want to lead with?

So appreciate this presentation it's the second time where I've seen some of it because I was on the Planning Commission So It's nice to see the land use coming and coming out to Can you talk about the on the mobility the part about maintaining freight? access and things like that and you know some of the other mobility topics that we were talking about of you know bringing down the number of lanes and things like that there's quite a few cars on this proposed growth i would hard it's hard to see that coming down so that's the one thing i'm sort of grappling with when we've thought about this street in particular this is the one where we're like it's going to be a road you know so can you just talk about what your thoughts are of how that actually would transition and things like that

Yes, I can start and then I'm going to pass it off to my colleague and friend at Farron Piers as well to back up what I'm saying with some authority. But I would just say that in our sort of preliminary studies, we've looked at many, many different, we're cutting cross sections of this entire corridor and looking at different conditions and you know, there's there's a lot of excess that there are multiple travel lanes in both directions, but then also these turn lanes, there's sort of extra spill out space because in general, probably there was just the space was there and so it was taken and given to the vehicles. And there probably wasn't too much thought thought beyond that. But what's critical is like we have to think about how people are using this street to get to the properties, right? Because it's not just that cars are driving down and turning at intersections. There's driveways, there's curb cuts. I mean, it is very important to think about this as an important conduit for commerce. And so what we're looking at is sort of, it's two-pronged. We're, of course, we need to model this and we can rely on data, I think, to some extent to help us understand what are the volumes and what can sort of be adjusted there. But we also need to be thinking about like, overall, as an entire network, does it actually support us, you know, in terms of like overall congestion, right? Does it actually support us to have all of this space for vehicles when there can be more sort of thoughtfully designed ways that we're sort of coordinating our movements. And we feel like there are very good precedents that we can learn from this. So Kelly, I don't know if you would like to sort of give your thoughts on that too.

Sure, I can add on to that. So yeah, based on initial analysis that we've done, which is just looking at existing conditions, we'll still need to look at like future growth and I'll take that into consideration. But yeah, based on the analysis of existing conditions, we're exploring a few different options and that's in tandem with public works staff about what might be

Oh, excuse me, could you speak a little closer to the mic? Oh, sure.

I think I have a tendency of speaking too close, so I tried to adjust this time, but thank you for the feedback, Councilmember. Yeah, so working in tandem with Public Works staff around what is palatable, what might be feasible, and coming up with starting to explore what potential solutions might look like, and that will continue. We're kind of at the start of that process, and so we'll continue as we build out the plan and get some buyout from you all on the vision tonight. dive a little bit deeper into that and look at projections for future growth, knowing that a lot of the future users, if they're coming from the train station, are not going to have a car. They're going to be getting here on foot and maybe biking using the bike share that's at the station. And so, yeah, the type of user that might be using this corridor in the future might be using a different mode. Or what are some other strategies that Where's freight getting off of the highway right now? Is there an opportunity for them to get off at the Redwood Highway exit and travel down North McDowell? So kind of taking the business owner feedback that we've received into account and trying to better understand and dive deeper, how are they using the corridor? And so we think there are opportunities to balance all these different users. There are a lot of creative solutions out there that other cities have have done so we can we can certainly look elsewhere and don't need to reinvent the wheel but all within the context of what the local community here would like to see and um yeah

Cool thanks um couple other questions uh I really appreciate the sort of um maker micro at the where currently the post offices I think that's a nice um balance and a nice way to sort of establish some sense of identity in place um from the station as you. arrive at the station and you realize like, oh, there's all these great, you know, maker micro businesses down there that I should go check out. You don't necessarily get that feel with a post office and a fire station there. How do you actually create that the demand for those businesses and things like that, right? Like, It feels like a chicken and the egg situation a little bit where like, you know, you've got to have the spaces and you've got to have it. But also you need the businesses to come into. Can you talk a little bit about how these sort of places come to come to be?

I can I can take a stab at this. It's very complicated and it is. Well, it is very chicken and egg. But I think part of it is like signaling to the to future consumers. applicants that you're this is an option that's on the table now so sort of even just the first step that you all took with establishing that land use designation is really huge because now that indicates to a different sort of market that this is a type of development this is a type of use that is going to find you know a home here so I think that that is the first step I think also thinking through like what are the inherent needs of those types of businesses and then ensuring that we can put forward standards and guidelines in the specific plan that maybe make that more friendly to them. I know we think a lot of other projects that we've worked on in the Bay Area along the peninsula in particular where there's El Camino Real has I think kind of a similar fabric and sensibility about how it's trying to preserve certain types of uses. We've looked a lot at how we can encourage that type of we call it production distribution and repair. So this idea of light industrial that wants to be close to other light industrial, like you want to see that clustering. But part of the reason that they want to be close to one another is because they tend to need to share certain types of resources like surface parking or like loading space. And so all of that, a specific plan is really well equipped to help put in place standards and guidelines to help sort of problem solve some of that, I would say. And so all of those can be ways to sort of help just ease the burden a little bit on the developer or the existing business, what have you. Those are ways that we can kind of help encourage those things to percolate. I don't know, Andrew, if there's more you wanted to add to that.

I think I want to add also that, you know, certainly the time that we spend in the plan area, we're seeing where these businesses have located, right? These highly entrepreneurial business activities, many of them are very stable and very committed to where they're located along McDowell Boulevard. So it's great to see that sort of that in the DNA of the plan area and to be able to build up on that by celebrating them, uplifting them, and kind of bringing them forward in that way that blends them as businesses, as entrepreneurs, as incubators, but then also creating that attachment that Annie showed in some of her imagery where you're creating those sort of third spaces for employees to come out, to socialize with one another, to celebrate the work that they're doing and more fully engage in the community.

Great. And then one final question. So when we talked about this at Planning Commission, there was some, I brought up some points that like there's actually quite a few like large heavy duty parking lots essentially there, right? Whether it's there's like a truck stop, there's the the post office, Recology, I saw Recology's logo there. Like, are we envisioning long term that we want to continue to have these large, like heavy duty parking lots, you know, businesses, obviously critical businesses to our community? Or are we do you do we envision those moving to a different corridor in the city or something like that long term?

I think we, so what we have done and those comments, you hopefully see that some of the changes that reflected in the land use plan, because you were very astute to point out that there are these sort of key sites that are producing a lot of greenhouse gas emissions, right? There's a lot of like truck idling, like these are sort of not conducive to this like livable green, like corridor experience that we're trying to achieve. And so I think in some cases, potentially, some of those opportunity sites, we see this specific plan as being able to put forward a vision to see those change into something that is maybe a little bit higher and better use, something that is maybe multi-purpose. But I think in terms of, to your second point about are all of these things going to go away, I think that's part of a bigger question about sort of the actual sort of character and vision overall, like that has not been something that I would say this plan is sort of strongly pushing forward wholesale.

Yeah. Sure. Thank you. I appreciate that. Thanks. That's all for me.

Council Member Shrips. Yeah, I've got a fairly long list of stuff, questions and comments, but they're more deep. So do you want me to wait till Andrew or graduate now?

Go for it. All right.

Okay. First, I just want to thank Nicola Fry, who I think sent in one of the nicest emails with a list of comments. So I'd like to make sure staff really pays attention. I liked a lot of the stuff that she listed down in there. Maybe even use a little AI, I suspect, to help get the consistency going through the different sections. But most of the comments I thought were very valuable to look at. So please look at her comments for sure. The other email I received that was very interesting was about water flow, vernal pools, water catchment systems and the like, and the whole water flow. The diagrams that you showed really did not show that well at all. And I think you even showed development of housing on places that absolutely should not have housing because it's actually a pond and a vernal pool on some of these spots. And I don't think you'll be even allowed to even get close to housing on a couple of these spots. So you really have to pay attention to the actual vernal pools out there on that. There's a piece of property we're trying to upgrade to like three stories, and that's part of the area that I've canvassed the last time I was going for this position. And after talking to several of the houses there right on the fence line, absolutely hate the idea of three stories looking out over, and they will fight you tooth and nail over it. on that one. So the recommendation and I have friends who actually live in the one of those old, really old houses right on Corona Road right there. And after talking with them, a couple of discussions, actually, that would be a really good area for a a manufactured home such as geo ship boxable and various other manufactured homes could be actually placed there in a community setting. And that would be a separate, its own little five-minute community that could be created in that spot. Maybe even with COTS services that are going in that would be a blend from everybody from moving in from the homeless all the way up to single families, single folks, to maybe even some seniors could all live in these basically tiny homes. So that would be a good spot for that. So I just want you to think about that as a possibility. And then that area right behind those couple of those older homes, the one that is actually almost looks like it may need to be pulled down, but it's a historic house. Right behind there is actually, it turns into a lake in wintertime. Uh, when the wet rains are flowing, it's actually a good place for a, um, a drain basin for recharge as a possibility. And there's, uh, and wildlife frequents that spot in wintertime. So you really have to pay attention to that particular spot. It's been documented, um, to have a very high value as a vernal pool for wildlife. So, um, please pay attention to that spot, which is right part of that 10 acre area that's in there. Um, in the areas in the, uh, transit, um, uh, mixed-use type area. You had some retail lined out, and I think there's got to be more than retail in those sections. There needs to be a lot more of community meeting spaces in that transit housing area. So instead of just building up and putting lots of housing in, not just retail, but there needs to be more gathering spaces, and my recommendation is a library annex. The library folks want to get in there, but actually, build out the library annex that does more than library it's actually a gathering spot for people to come in and do things together crafts for kids hobbies make it a separate almost a community center as well as a library so a mini community center there as well as a library that has multiple uses for for that community So that has to be incorporated, which means that you have to think of much more holistic people-centered. I know you talked a little bit in your reports about the people-centeredness of it all. I think you need to up it one more level. I think Nicola Fry mentioned that several times in the verbiage and in the pattern. more people-centered entirely, not just housing that needs to be put in, and not just high-density housing, oh, it's going to work. And it needs to be a better plan with where you're going to put the housing, what its shape is going to be, and I think Even if you predesign a an actual 3D structure, what it might actually look like as part of the plan development that you're doing, a 3D structure, what that property might look like just from viewpoints might be helpful to actually see what it might end up being. If it's three, four or five stories, what that looks like from different angles, that should be easy to do using 3D modeling now. So that should be part of your plan development. And so I really want to make sure, and then the person that shouldn't be blocked out, okay, parcel by parcel has to be bought. And then each one, each parcel gets developed differently by a different developer. No, it needs to be planned out so that holistically gets developed, maybe by a single developer. Let's work on that. The other area in that transit area, because touching that little circle that's going around is, okay, this is absolute rule. Okay, if it touches that little circle, it gets included. If it doesn't touch it, and so it makes it kind of weird shape to that areas. If we're going to include most of it, there's a couple of properties not in there. Let's go ahead and let's try to include those properties and allow that to make it a more uniform. So they have choices on those properties to join or not join into this transit so that they can do things or whether they can develop even into turn into retooks. It's right there on the edge there for these private properties. They're stuck there. It's like, okay, I've got this farmstead. And I'm surrounded by these five-story buildings all around me. You destroyed my living habitat, and yet you're now allowing me to do it and sell my property to do the same thing. So let's make sure that all those properties in that block right by on that Eli Road, there's two or three of those parcels not included. Let's get those included so it's blocked out as to what it actually does or transition or back off. But it needs to be shaped so that those property owners also have options for their future. Otherwise, they are stuck in a place where they don't want to live anymore. Right. Okay. So that's the area there. Just as a comment, just really look at the 2013 master plan for the transit. I think there's a lot of stuff that you used in your plans. I think you looked at it. There's a lot of Wednesday copying, but you use a lot of the same language and concepts and ideas. So that was a really good report. So look at it again and make sure those are included in that. And maybe even let's copy some of that for even our downtown station also. Maybe we can even just say, oh, let's just copy it down there and let's do the same thing. For the downtown to kind of upgrade the whole master plan for the smart stations while you're doing this. That's just like, could I just do that automatically develop your report? Let's copy it for the downtown. Do it. Thank you. Five minutes, five seconds later, it's done. Deal. Can you do that? So whatever. Then on the OK, then I'm looking at the district. OK, it's almost all in District one. Councilman J. Canada Thompson may have to go out to a 1000 more homes to to do it if it stays in district 1. so maybe we need to divide that out and push out. So eventually, not this round, but plan out maybe for the next round of voting and 4 years from that. As people move in, we're going to have to redistrict our voting for districts 1, 2, and then probably 6 across the way. I have to shift the lines a little bit to accommodate that large population growth in that area. So think about that as you're doing this, thinking about who's going to live there, how many folks are going to live there, and how we actually divide up the folks by voting district and school district. Seems like a lot of folks will go to the wall. Make sure we have while principle and superintendent for the school district really engage involved in how he's going to take over these students and plan ahead does this is his schools capable of absorbing that many young people if young people move into this place. I'm not sure he has the capacity to do that. So let's make sure that happens. I didn't see anything about the school system supporting the population density. There was a, what was mentioned was actually building a sidewalk and bike path on Washington, just east of McDowell. So there was one little line mentioned there. You even showed a picture of that particular corridor in your slideshow here. But you mentioned it, but you didn't say how that might actually work. So you have to transform Washington Street in that section and that whole ditch in that section. And how are you going to actually put in a bike path and a sidewalk and make that work right into that intersection to get people from the area where I live, right there, down into the malls? So that was a concern that I had. And then there was another one of the bike path you listed out that actually is going to cross Lynch Creek where there is no bridge. So do we need to build a bridge in that location that you're located on your maps? Because you have a dotted line that's going to go from here right across Lynch Creek right into the housing development there at Creekside, and then turn around and come on down and get across McDowell and Washington intersection. So I can see them on a couple of the streets that might work if it's the side streets, but you have it going right through a housing development and over a creek where there's no bridge right now. So how does that actually work? So make sure you get to clear that up at the smart station, especially near Meridian. The Meridian is going to have a little bit of like a store or something, a little gathering spaces there, but mostly for their residents. And how are you going to look at your slides? Beautiful slides of what a maker space and not maker space, but a gathering spots around the smart station might look like. Where is that actually going to go? What actual space is that going to fit in? Is it going to be on the other side of the tracks? Is it going to be part of the Meridian property? Is it going to be part of the triangle that's there? So, where exactly can that space that you showed these beautiful settings where people are gathering? What does that actually look like in that space? What does it shape? Is it going to be this long track of these several buildings? And how are people actually going to get there to that spot? Because the train tracks are right there. So you prevented an idea, but I don't see how to implement it in the actual space that exists there. So nice words. I want to see implementation process as part of your plan, as part of that station, to make it so that people get off the train and how they physically get across the tracks or down the path to wherever this space is and who else is going to be there to gather. So a nice concept. What's the reality going to look like, right? So make it more real because you have lots of nice words in this whole plan, all these beautiful things that you're going to produce. But the implementation, I'm going, huh, how? So, I want to see a lot in your plan how and where exactly you're going to put something same thing with the, that goes down to where you go to the health district where you're going to transform. Maybe the, the pause a little bit and that and rainier road as it crosses under here, because there is a proposal for a, some development across the freeway. So how are you going to tie that into that section across Rainier and their spaces there the dog park right there is that going to transform or not you didn't even mention the dog park and what that might turn into so where's that go what's happening there so in that road and what however near so if that development goes in or not goes in assuming it's going to eventually go in if that's going to be the part of the plan. Because that's what's in the books, what's being proposed now, it's sort of been asked for. So how are you going to incorporate that into this whole system? Because you're going to have a bunch of housing across that freeway in the plants, but it's not in your plants. So please add it, make sure it's there. And how are you going to connect it all and make those people happy and what they come across and how are they going to gather and participate in all this? And then there's, of course, connecting that and then there's all the bike paths we want to produce in the whole Greenway area there, which I think should be part of your plan since you're so close to the freeway. But that may not be part of your mission because the line where the lines are drawn. There wasn't much talk about how you're going to get the other forms of transit besides just buses going and the train going. There's going to be a whole lot of where we're going to be moving into autonomous vehicles, shared ride vehicles, various electrified handicapped vehicles coming in, wheelchairs included, encapsulated compartments. But there's very little discussion on how you're going to incorporate all of that type of movement. You included pedestrians and bikes, but you didn't include handicap, and you didn't include microcars or autonomous vehicles. And so there's forward thinking. Even if you really want to look forward, at Calistoga, recently they had a data center that was proposed. Part of the data center was an autonomous drone to carry people around as part of that project. in Calistoga. That was just proposed to Calistoga, which included that type of modern transport. So that's a whole other topic there to think about. But how are you going to include autonomous vehicles, buses, and cars that are coming as part of the transit-oriented community so that they can get from there to the other areas where they're going to work and back home again? So those concepts need to be included. And then the other one is on the, you had nice ideas about the maker space, but if you go down there, I ride my bike down there, I've visited some of the industries, I've actually bought things in those industrial parks in that whole section, and it's pretty industrial looking. A lot of maker shops that are pretty, the buildings are very, They're a little bit squarish, and so they don't look as friendly and nice. There's very little nice. You have the farm stand there, which is for the marijuana that's being retailed. It'd be really nice if there was a cafe Marijuana cafe added next door and maybe that they could convert and do something with. So, and then these gather spot, I know, I've been there a couple of times to events and they're trying their best to create that into a event type area, but it's not really that friendly to get there and do things there. So how are you actually going to. Put the words you're saying about making this huge maker space, all this beautiful stuff so that all these beautiful buildings you sewed doesn't look like that at all. How are you going to make that happen and how are you going to get people to actually make it work to get there and back? Again, you have a lot of great theories and hopes and dreams. I'm talking about conversion and reality here for a lot of this stuff. Okay. All right. That's actually my list.

And will you be able to submit the list so that we can?

Well, you see it's handwritten. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Brainstorm ideas, but if you want me to type, would you like me to type this up for you?

I think it would be actually helpful to get the context correct. Okay, I can type this all up. Thank you. I think, you know, I was going to jump in here for a minute. And one of the things I heard from council is that the plan looks lovely. There's, I mean, the vision side of it is really bold and good stuff. but my mind being the engineer is like well how do we recruit the investment that fulfills the vision you know where's where are the tools that connect um many of the things i think the public feedback in is really a referendum on what's good and what's not good in my community at this time and and the remedy being asked is fix what's already wrong and um that's That's difficult for a futuristic plan to address a retroactive problem. But that's what the public kind of wants to hear. Many of the things like stormwater improvements in front of the shopping center, the green stitches that we call them, You know, if there was redevelopment, if there was a residential property proposal onto that, we could nick them. But I think that the street is the high end. So property water doesn't drain to that side. All of their stormwater improvements would be towards the freeway side of the property. And so it would be treating street water, which would be awesome because that's where the crap is that you want to filter in your bioretention soils. But all that is city subsidy. All that is fixing it retroactively. And so it bothers me that the plan focuses so much on that because the more we focus on that, the more interested we'll be to put that burden on developers. And the more we put it on the developers, the less likely that any of the vision comes true because we've burdened the developer with the historic problem. So I would love to see policy that clearly distinguishes that the improvement is makes things makes itself better but doesn't maybe go into the community and it has to be explained to the public why that those two things can't happen at the same time um but um I think also the big assumption is that we're creating something that will happen, that there will be growth because of this, and maybe lots of growth because of this. I'm not that optimistic. I think the plan, we've done many, many quality plans, but they disconnect with the abilities of developers to change. And those ugly tilt-up warehouses we look at there, Griffo's doing something inside of it, but there's essentially no outside beneficial rollout. So he gets the maker space, and his business does well, and that's good. But to tear down the one next to it to have a courtyard is highly unlikely. We would visualize that. We would like to have that. But the way retrofits works... I see the more modest things happening rather than the bold. I think then the question is, does the city stake out the intent for the city to be bold? A lot of these could form assessment districts, redevelopment districts, a red district. redevelopment, point two. So what are the chances that business owners would get together and do a thing? And those are kind of the conversations that I feel need to be had and maybe aren't fully fleshed out yet. When we talk about the annexation area, I think that we are pushing urban at the station into rural away from the station. And there needs to be a tapering or a transition. So I would assume there'd be parklands at the perimeter of that arc that are clearly identified. And right now it looks like streets carve up the whole of the circle. And I think we could be more specific that more density stays near the existing road, Corona, and it tapers out, which would mean it tapers out towards Eli and doesn't connect to Eli. And if there were more parklands along the trail there, would that even be an annexation or would the city, and we should identify people whether a park owner would arise or it would be, a landscape assessment district that has the perimeter of that circle area. You know, we need to figure out ownerships while we're making a vision. Let's figure out who's really going to be burdened by or benefited by those decisions. I concur on the freight conditions along McDowell. We had this discussion there. But again, I would suggest that it's more nuanced than that. There's a dense business community at both ends of this study zone, but in the middle is a dense residential area. And I would rather that trucking didn't go from one commercial area through the residential into the next commercial with that. And I think that can be done by tapering road width in there. So it was obvious if you come off Washington, you return to Washington. If you come off Old Redwood, you return to Old Redwood. And you want to do it where you don't impinge on the businesses. You're sensitive to the comment they made about good freight. but you're also sensitive to the fact that maybe traffic counts in that middle part would allow for a narrower road, and the narrow road would encourage trucks not to come through that area. A general plan comment that I've made a number of times is that I worry we're losing grocery store potential. When we talk about how to redevelop an area, If someone, like say they're doing down in Santa Fe, proposing a big housing project on top of a Safeway, well, then you're creating a food ghetto. And the same can be said of other types of use in that area. So when we call something maker, I mean, I really appreciate that we're identifying it and zoning it kind of away from those non-nose use. Are we zoning in any food for the residential? And again, not just the pretty picture, but why would anyone do that? I mean, or put differently, what's the investment motivation? There were discussions about stakeholder input and things and... And I wanna make sure that our nonprofit affordable housing partners are consulted. Each of them has a different model. Some suggest that 50 units is a buildable space. Others are saying, no, at this point, 100 is the minimum buildable space. It's important that we achieve affordable housing. I think the only way we can do that is if we talk to those folks about the different models and find out which one might work in some of this zone. I did like Council Member Schripp's comment on manufactured homes, and there's a real nice one in Cotati where the city had a little property and they dropped in five houses real quick for affordable housing right on East Cotati. How do we zone that? How do we objective design that? How does that get in where that's a good thing? Partially I'm asking because you don't know which property is interested in what development. So how do you put a pallet out? And I think I'll actually ask that one as a question. You know, of all the things we're doing, how do we make sure they're attractive? How do we recruit the investment?

I can start. I don't know that example. I don't know how it would comply with whatever the existing zoning was there. I think there's a lot of opportunity with a specific plan to get creative. I think what we also, I mean, it's very heartening to hear, I'm sensing an interest in trying things differently. um because there's a desire to maybe see some different outcomes and not just keep rolling the dice and see what happens so i think this is actually a really good opportunity um i think in terms of um sort of creative housing production types um i think it's a question of like how much do you need the specific plan to actually codify like different standards for development versus just having the city having different types of conversations with developers, sort of gauging interest, understanding what are their pain points. I would want to think about, if we look at the specific plan and what tools are available there, we could think about density. Are there sort of thresholds that are just not working for those types of products? Oftentimes with those, again, I don't know exactly what this project is, but sometimes looks can be deceiving. And so you can have these types of manufactured or sort of sort of predesigned offsite products that are brought in. They're very, very dense. And so they might not be compliant with density thresholds, even though they are single family. They're very small lot. They might be stacked units. And so while they look like great, you know, sort of modest density, they might not be. And so they might not be compliant with some of the density thresholds that exist. So I would, we'd need to look at that. But this is very much the kind of thing that I would, Perkins and Well would love to bring forward into a specific plan. Like if there's appetite for this, that's something that is very exciting to us.

I guess, thank you. And that's, you know, you're right. It's about being creative and it's about the partnerships that get formed between different developers and different property owners. I guess my question, which I asked in council questions to staff early, can we get anything to an entitlement or a buy-write level? So much of development is challenged by not knowing exactly what this means. And I think The better the vision appears, the less the vision is specific. And it leaves a developer in a place where they're uncertain of a project. And our growth rate has been quite slow. We have not built many houses, like 99 houses last year, of which only 30 were market rate. What what do we do to get it very specific on the properties? What can be built and what are the hurdles that we should be trying to solve here?

That's I think a really important question and it's it's a question that we're asking not just of the specific of this specific plan project will also be asking that same question and of the downtown station area transit-oriented communities update project, and we're asking it through the Petaluma Zoning Reform Project. So, I think it's one certainly that I and several others are thinking about and talking about on a daily basis. I think that a strong vision is important. You want to have a vision that inspires. You want to have a vision that encourages people to invest. To your point, how do we get people to invest? Part of that is because they see that you're very committed to the future of an area through your vision and through your policies and such. However, I think that some of the conversation we have to have through zoning reform and through these other projects is, How do you set forth what you want but not to such exquisite detail that it can't be achieved? And perhaps a great example of that is when we look at the downtown smart station and the work that was done in the 2013 TOD master plan. That was very highly specific about what was wanted for the smart site. And if that is what is established as the community's vision for that site and the community's expectation and a developer looks at that, then the developer is making that decision on the front end without ever consulting you. They're looking at it and saying, well, that's not the product we develop or that's not going to pencil. And so they're not even brought into it to explore further and to see if that's a project that they want to pursue. So I do think it's finding that balance. It's creating those opportunities. It's having some objective standards in place to make sure that you get some of the things that you want. But then it's also indicating through your vision and through your policies that you are flexible and that you are looking for those creative moments and opportunities for people to invest in your community.

Yeah, I appreciate how well we've done that in the general plan. I'm just wondering, is there a philosophical or a technical difference when you get to a specific plan where you should be trying to narrow that so you do have specific investment encouraged?

Yes, yes. I mean, that's the value of the specific plan is that we can start to think about actual places and what are the sort of conditions that seem to be evident there that then lend themselves to a certain development type. So we can establish things like scales, you know, thinking about sort of how large blocks might want to be. And those blocks should be sized to be thinking about a development type that can be self-parked or that works well with other types of like development types that we see in the market today. Like we can sort of align ourselves to be market ready. And then what you're describing is like we don't. we don't need to just think about what's currently getting built because that's already outdated. I mean, so much of like what developers look at, they're looking at the past, like they don't have crystal balls. They're very risk averse. But what you're describing is people that want to be creative and recognizing that this current system is not actually getting us the types of new neighborhoods that we want to see, that people want to live in. There's a market for it, but maybe the market is not delivering on that. So how can we then think about possibly some strategies that are a little bit different. So we need to look at that. I mean, the Katahdi example you're describing, I would love to look into that. I think that there's definitely precedence that we can start to think about, but I think we also need to think about maybe what is the role of this specific plan where it's more specific, it's more location-specific, and then what needs to happen at a city-wide policy level, and maybe it's finding some balance there.

Thank you. Council member now.

Thank you. I have some land use questions and I'm looking at the study session page 14 in that area right across from the smart station. There's a gold area that says higher intensity residential. Can you tell me what Is that two-story, three-story? What are we talking about? Higher-intensity residential. What are we thinking about?

Yes. So this, and I apologize because we were sort of trying to, like, truncate the presentation. But then in the process, we've now made it longer. Yeah. So I can explain this. So what you're seeing on that slide, and I think I was sharing the screen, and now I'm not. But, yes, it's a... It's slide 41.

Do you want to see what I'm looking at?

Oh, reshare, okay. It's the study session.

Oh, shoot. I know, but I'm not sharing the screen.

Study session, planning commission, session 14. Yes. Can you see it? I can't see it. It turns white. just has it has a legend and this on the left side it says housing economic economy and place Yes. Yes. Okay. So. Plan priorities. Yes. Walkable 15-minute community. Yep. Neighborhood.

So think about this as we're wading into actual land use designations. And so first it's just about sort of relative use and relative intensity. And so that sort of marigold color that you're highlighting. Correct. Yes. So the idea is that. is the area that is most proximate to the station. And so we would, you know, that's an opportunity to think about a higher intensity, but it's agnostic to stories. Like when you're asking about, is this three stories? Is this four? This is just thinking about overall, we wanna see a bit more, more intensity of use closer to the station. And then it feathers out? And then the idea, exactly, is that as you move further out, that intensity would reduce. And then what you're seeing actually in sort of a hatched sort of rim at the farthest edge of the plan area, the sort of green hatch, is this idea of really reestablishing a buffer land. Because when we think about what this land is today, it's effectively, it's so undeveloped that it really does serve as pretty significant open space and transitional space between our more urbanized part of Petaluma and the perimeter. And so having that transitional space is really important for so many different reasons, for fire, for wildfire risk, just from an ecological standpoint, how we think about, I mean, Petaluma is so well known for the urban growth boundary, right? Like, we need to maintain these thresholds, and there's a reason for that. And so that is sort of the intent there, is the feathering or the sort of transitioning from the center out.

So help me with that. Is it zoned ag correct right now?

The entire unincorporated area, I believe, is a mix of agriculture or residential. It's county land use designation. So it's a mix of ag residential and I think just very low density residential.

So what would the lot size be? We're talking about single family homes. Are we, is it acreage or is it, because it can't be dense. Because we're feathering out. So what would the parcel size be?

So I might go to the next, where we actually show the land use designation. So what you're seeing now on slide 52. It says rural residential. Yeah, would be sort of translating now the general plan update land use designations, how could those potentially apply here if we were to take those designations? And so the feathering that's occurring, it starts with the town center mix use, which is the purple that you see. And I believe that's a four-story maximum. It goes then to hide us here to the street.

Correct.

Yes And and most you know, this is within like a five-minute walk of the station So it's really thinking about that proximity and then it would feather it could feather out to what is high density residential in the general plan, which is I believe also four-story maximum, but again the what we maybe didn't sort of talk about enough is the MTC and TOC policy, which establishes minimum densities that need to be sort of achieved in order to stay available for future funding. So we have to stay within that framework. But it's an average.

Okay.

And so I think that's really, really critical to understand is that this is not uniform monolithic. It's about how do we just maintain what MTC establishes as a 25 dwelling unit per acre average. And so that can be applied in many different types of ways. And that feathering approach that several people have mentioned feels like a really good way to think about that. Start higher and then move out.

Okay. The other thing is the pathway. Would it go all the way to Lagunitas? I hear that complaint quite a lot from people that are taking a smart up to go to Lagunitas. They don't want to walk on McDowell. They want to walk on a nice path Sonoma has paths like that between, I think, their wineries and subdivisions. And they want to walk on that, you know, a bike. Yeah. And the Brody Ranch residents, they also want to use a path that takes them to Lagunitas or Hen House across the street. So is that path going to go?

So... Not maybe that. Let me define the path. First of all, yes, we definitely want people walking and biking to Lagunitas. That I think should be a goal overall. And so right now, the smart pathway, the alignment, it's on the other side of the smart rail from where the Lagunitas parcel is. And it's very difficult to punch through how you would bridge that or tunnel. What this plan could bring forward, though, is we could use some of the extra space that is actually on the other, that is on the Lagamita side of the smart rail line. There's actually city-owned land that runs sort of, it's almost, we could think of it as like frontage. It's like access space to get to the smart path, or to get to the smart rail line. And so we've been looking at that as maybe an opportunity to basically create a second pathway that would be on the other side of the rail line that would get you right to Lagunitas. It would get you into the sort of industrial district. So people that are commuting, you know, you could really imagine commuting um in a much more sort of human oriented way um but also potentially we could think about mcdowell as you know if there is a ability to maybe redistribute a little bit of space it does not take much um to create a really viable safe um vertically separated is what we call them bike paths so you have some sort of physical barrier between the path of travel for the bike and the cars, that could also be an option. And maybe they both could be, you know, I mean, I think like that's sort of what we're trying to bring forward is that there's a lot of different spaces where we could imagine introducing that type of connection here, especially north of Corona.

Yeah, I was happy to see that you had Skippies. Another area that I have frequent is there's a church hidden in that industrial area, I've attended a few funerals. And as a community space, I've seen You know, people gather there. And then there's also a little hidden gem called Central Milling that a lot of people come for bread flour and for pizza flour and for cooking classes. So that's another tourist draw up to this area. But it's not really a walkable right now. So I'd like to really see some walkable areas. And then, of course, we have the Palace of Fruit at the far end. So... Anyway, thank you, and I look forward to hearing from the stakeholders.

Can I bring in public comment at this point? I think. All right. Council Member Shrib.

Just one more item I forgot to mention. I did look at the 2013 report for the transits for the smart train, and looking at the page 83, which is 3-11 in the report, There is a list, and it's a long list of all the businesses in that entire makerspace with their retail demand, retail sales, and leakage, a surplus type thing. So there's actually numbers, lists of all the businesses and numbers, which I did not see in this report. I want to just make sure that you have all of the businesses in this area listed. And we know, and then, oh, maybe there's a lot more connections that could be made for all these little businesses, as we mentioned, like the bakery, which I've been to, which is a beautiful little cookery stations in there for teaching cooking of baking. So, yeah, so how do we get there? And if we don't, there's even a, I mean, the Mac beds, there's a place where they make wall beds, fancy things for the hotels, very high end quality type things. So how do we get people to walk in and look at that? Look at those beds. There's a little showcase there, but it's hidden. So there's all sorts of little businesses there that people need to know about. Most people don't even know it's there. So let's make sure that that is part of your report as to what's available to go by or see in that area. Thank you.

Council Member DeCarli. Thank you.

Thank you for your report I'm curious in the area that being considered for the transit village was there any outreach done to the people whose properties those are whose homes those are that are looking at being very affected by this.

Yes we're just getting ready to reach out to them as a as a collective but right now to map to property members in that area are on the working group. So they've been coming to the meetings, I think they're here tonight too, and giving us input. And they've also been giving us anecdotal stories about other property owners, but we're trying to establish a meeting with all of them. We've also already started talking with LAFCO about what would that process be like if the council, future council, wants to annex that. So they've started giving us advice for what we need to do for contacting owners, contacting registered voters,

and doing a municipal services review i realize tonight is a workshop and there's no voting action here but why would we not invite all of those property owners you know to have a say in this as it is a workshop

They're invited to anything that we do. I can't make them come, but yes, we put out notice about this. And also one of the working group members who I said is a property owner there, he's been doing outreach. He's been responsible for bringing people, for instance, to the March 21st workshop. But we haven't actually convened an organized meeting with all of the property owners that we can get into the room at one time.

I just think it would be more the right thing to do to tell them ahead of time because I spoke to a couple that had no idea that tonight was happening, you know, who could not make it. But I think if we're proposing massive changes to people's lands that they should know about it. And then why is it that we're allowing the 2013 plan to expire or being asked to let it expire?

Is that the Todd plan? The 2013 Todd plan? Yeah. It's largely because MTC, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, has advanced their transit thinking and their public, their published policies, if you will. And the grant that's actually funding this needs to adhere to what their policies are now, the TOC, the Transit Oriented Communities Policy. So everything we're doing about the four pillars of that are density housing station access and policy so we're actually adhering to more relevant policy right now how much do we anticipate that this new plan is going to cost from start to finish someone from the city might know her or anybody the planning process or to develop the division pardon the planning process or to develop the vision

I mean all of it to end up at the end with a plan in our hands for this area.

Oh, well right now we're working just with the $1,150,000 grant from MTC and that's all that's been identified so far. So we're proceeding along those lines.

Do we anticipate it may cost more?

We do not. I heard something.

Okay. And then did we reach out to the consultant that created the 2013 plan coming into this?

No, we haven't done so. The plan was adopted by the city. So in terms of reaching out to that consultant, it's not a plan that we wouldn't typically consult with them.

Okay. So this, you know, this 2013 plan I'm talking about, you know, it includes both stations and it's actually won an award because it was such a good plan. And, you know, even though, you know, the $1.15 million is a grant, it's still tax dollars. It's not free money. You know, I think that that 2013 plan is something we should really be looking at as the foundation. Um, you know, and starting with that and and changing it as we need to, it's only 10 years old or 13 years old. You know, we probably should have reached out to the consultant that performed it. Um, I think that would have made sense. I think that would have probably saved money for the city. Um, because it's largely a lot of it is what we're talking about tonight, you know, and the area itself hasn't really changed all that much. It's had a little bit of development, but it's at large, it's pretty much the same area, pretty much the same buildings, pretty much the same footprint. And so, you know, I think that plan is actually really important. I wish that would have been, I mean, I went and found it, I read through it, wish that would have been included in everything that we were given tonight. And then, so then let's see. You know, Councilman Shribbs mentioned, you know, some of the level of detail in that 2013 plan, and that includes market demand, regional demographics, income demographics, retail market overview, impact of future retail, employment overview, expected market for land use, a couple other things. I mean, it's very detailed, and it tells you exactly what that plan is going to do, how it's going to affect the area in a, you know, good way or bad way, whatever you know, whatever they considered at the time, but it tells you what's going to happen right there in great detail. Is that something we're going to see in this plan?

Well, you're going to see our vision implemented. I can't explain why the 2013 plan hasn't been implemented yet.

Right. But I'm looking, I mean, I'm looking for vision with substance, you know, with actual studies to say, this is what our vision is going to do for your city. And they included several things that they studied that show that. So I'm asking if you're going to include that.

Yes. I don't know that we'll be able to get to the detail that the council member explained with each business being, you know, leakage and retail leakage because some of that analysis has already been done and it's in the existing conditions report. But there will be other chapters besides vision like what are the development standards? What are the public realm standards? How do you achieve the vision either through private development or public development?

Right. But I mean, we've really focused lately on developing an economic plan and really driving home that that is, you know, kind of at the center of our town that controls everything that affects the health of our town. You know, I think that's something we would all really want to see is that level of detail looking at what this plan is actually going to do. So, and then as far as sense of place and viewsheds go, Are we identifying viewsheds and what do those actually look like and what are you trying to preserve and keep in place in your vision?

I would believe I believe the general plan probably has some. Guidance on the sheds you court like protect you court or is present quarters to be preserved this specific plan would need to adhere to those. At this point we are not put like this vision that we presented doesn't propose alternative or additional few quarters but I mean. That's certainly something that could be discussed.

I mean, if it's a vision, we should see what we're trying to preserve, right? Sure. You know, like, I mean, I can tell you standing on McDowell kind of across from the new new development that's going up by the train depot. You can't see the Sonoma Mountains anymore, you know, and really that sense of place and why people move here and live here. I mean, that's very important, and that's a lot of white people live here, is so they can look around, they know they're in Petaluma, they know they're in our valley, and they can see the mountains and the hills. And, you know, looking at some other aspects of what's proposed here, I think you lose a lot of that. And so I really would encourage we actually look at and define what sense of place is here, what we're actually trying to preserve in this vision. And then... Kind of moving on to McDowell and redesigning that street. Just in the last few years, we spent, I think, around $12 million or so, maybe, you know, repaving that entire road. And that is the only major road that we've actually paved in the five-year plan.

Actually, that's incorrect. We paved Maria. We've paved Garfield, so.

But those aren't major roads like McDowell.

Maria.

I mean, it is a significant road, but it's not like McDowell. Either way. Point taken. Let's move on. Either way, we just spent $12 million on it. Now we're already talking about redesigning it. And there's lots of other very important roads in town, heavily trafficked, used, that people every day ask, when is this going to get repaved? And so I don't understand why are we actually looking at repaving that road?

Well, it's definitely more than repaving. It's a 30, 40-year vision. So while repaving, there's, like, we can think about maintenance and just ensuring that our public facilities, our roads, are kept to a certain minimum standard of quality. This vision is about proposing an alternate, like, identity for that street. So it goes beyond repaving, and that would be the reason.

I'm going to interfere here for a second. This is a vision. This is not a project. So I think in terms of priority and expenditures and things, and that's where my question earlier went to do this about like, how do these things actually occur? Because I concur with you, the people want their streets paved. And you can't do a complete vision without showing the completeness of this area, but you're not funding a project for it. That conversation about funding and priority and projects around town will have a different date.

I'm just pointing out that we've already spent a significant amount of money there. The vision probably shouldn't include it.

So that would be your input on it, is you prefer the vision as it is versus a different... It's not a question of other things.

I mean, I understand the vision of connectivity, and there is a path along the railroad tracks. There are other trails. There's what's been proposed on Corona. I mean, there's a lot of connectivity already in place or going in place. There's bike lanes on McDowell. We had to buy a special street sweeper just for it.

Corona has... a project associated or no project association with it and improvements in the vision will occur with the project, McDowell would have to be investigated independently as a priority unless it was funded by a project. Like if the post office converts, then you can nick the post office developer for the adjoining improvements of your vision. So you want to talk about what vision is. I think that's where you want to focus there.

Right. No, that is, I mean, I'm focusing on the vision. I'm saying we've already just done something here. I don't think we need to redesign it. And that kind of does it for my questions. I'll save the rest for comments.

Council Member Cater-Thompson?

I look at Soma Village in Rohnert Park, and I see the housing around there, and I see how that area has really become really vibrant over the last 10 years. It's a real difference. And then I look at this area, and, well, first of all, I just want to say the downtown smart station development and this should be looked at very differently. There are two different animals. One is close to a downtown, and the other one is an industrial area and housing. And so you really can't compare the two. So as far as this project, and I'm just going to specifically talk about the land that needs to be annexed in, I feel as though we have to be really sensitive to the rural area. But I think we don't have enough housing in this community, and we need housing. And what I'd like to see is more dense toward the rail station. I want to see a lot more green space, though. And I'd like to see single-family homes on the outer area with smaller yards, but a lot of green space that people actually can go to. And I look at McNeer Park, you know, before, you know, it was a gathering space. And so I look at this area as a space that needs gathering. I'm not talking about ball fields, but I'm just talking about picnic areas. And so people will actually use these areas as part of their living instead of big backyards. I don't really want to see huge homes here. I want to see modest homes that are for sale, first-time homebuyers. I wouldn't mind seeing some maybe quads lots there, not quad lots, but development with four units in one maybe. Look at something like that. But I think we really have to be careful about feathering into the rural area and not overdeveloping. And I don't want to see these big, huge, 3,000 square foot homes with three car garages. So I really wanna make sure that the water retention is with this area. It's an area of concern. And I just really wanna see what we're gonna be doing where the water is going to be flowing, either onsite, does it go offsite, any of it, what happens with the water. And then, of course, Corona Road needs to be redone all the way up to Ely. And then we need to look at Ely kind of so it incorporates Ely and Corona, so it incorporates into the rural area and to urban areas. I think I want to just go into McDowell since that seems to be a topic. When I look at Transport, Commerce, and Dynamic Street, those are three streets really close together. It's an industrial area. And if it was originally built and thought out a little bit differently, you probably would have had just one driveway going in and out. And so, you're not having all this cross traffic. And so, that's part of the problem with McDowell is you have too many driveways and yet they're going into the same area. And so figure a way of lessening the driveways and so making it so mobility is safer. Because it's not a very safe street. It may have had a nice resurfacing, but the street itself is not safe. Go out of the cottages, the mobile home park, take a left. It's really not safe. And so what I'm looking for, McDowell, is safety improvements, less driveways, and safer for the public to walk because nobody wants to walk on McDowell because of those reasons. When CID Commons was approved, there was a bridge access area there, and that should be incorporated in this so we know that we can go from one side of the river to the other. And since that area was set aside, it should at least be considered. consider having an access underneath the rail bridge so you can actually get to the smart path because right now from this side of town you really can't get to the smart path unless you go down the Litch Creek Trail and then down pay ran and eventually get there so I'd like to see more interconnectivity there and I would like to see workspaces. So if you build small, let's go back to the development area. If we go there, if you have workspaces, so you can have smaller houses so people can actually leave their space and be able to work, but they don't have to necessarily be in their homes. I don't want to see a sea of parking in this area. If there is parking, I'd rather have it So it's not seen. And that's one thing about Brody Ranch, where the condos are. It's just a really blank, asphalted area. And I think it could have been designed a lot better that you really don't see the cars. And what's the one on Livia on Petaluma Boulevard? I mean, the cars are underneath and they're really not seen. The GSA, the groundwater committee that I'm part of, I know is talking to the courtrooms about recharge. Even though that's not part of this project, it is interconnected. And so I think it's important that you work with the GSA group just to make sure what they're talking about with the courtrooms. their property and the other properties up north of the rail of the rail station that's probably all I have to say now but I will have more comments later I want to spell one thing it needs to be a really vibrant and I think that's what we're really looking for how do you interconnect McDowell now we have sidewalks going up north so it's not as daunting as it is walking at McDowell from Washington Street So I think we can make it a much better corridor and a much safer corridor And I think we can get the housing that we need you know we here we have We have a city that people can't buy a house people can't downsize from a house and so I think this area has a lot of opportunities and And but most importantly for me is really feathering into the rural area. So it doesn't look like it's I don't want three, four stories and I don't want huge houses right into the rural area. I rather see more internal green space.

Thank you. Let's go to public comment and have the clerk help us out here.

We did receive 2 public comments ahead of the meeting and those are posted online. We also have 8 attendees in the zoom meeting. Thank you at this time. I will start. Oh. Well, I'll start 32nd clock and during these 30 seconds members of the public attending in person should bring their cards to my desk members of the public attending online should raise their virtual hand and those attending via phone should press star 9 to raise their hand. Speaker request received after this time may not be accommodated. Okay, I do have 2 hands that's Frank and Veronica Olson.

Okay, thank you. Public comment on the item tonight. And let's see, we have a number of speaker cards here, and we will allow those speakers to speak first, and then we'll go back to the clerk, and the clerk will bring in our Zoom people. And at this time, we have, and on an item, we would allow all speakers. So, first speaker is Julie Groves, and our second speaker is Nicola Frey.

Well, do I have one minute or three minutes? Three minutes. You have three minutes. Okay. So I have, first, thank you on all these comments are very, very helpful and I'm And I'm repeating some of the things that you have mentioned, so I appreciate that. So I've submitted a plan to manage four water issues in a strip of land that runs from the Corona Smart Station all the way up to Eli. And if you put up that slide that you mentioned on page 14, It shows part of that strip of land right along the tracks within that circle. And I'm proposing extending that, and that strip of land would be part of the voter-approved expansion land. And it continues the strip that, as I said, that is already identified next to the train station. It addresses primarily the vernal pools that would also help with aquifer recharge. And we've talked, the word resiliency was used earlier. It also, at the end near the, where we're, Planning to have more building, it decreases the runoff into the pedal and river and at the end closer up to Eli, it can address the flooding that occurs regularly at 5,400 old Redwood highway, which is city annex land. And I want to give credit to Steve era of the planning manager of Sonoma county regional park, who called our attention to the significance of these few remaining vernal pools. And then the information you have, it shows a picture of those pools. And I appreciate that that's been mentioned by several of you. And you identified, John, that there may be other vernal pools further along Corona Road that may need to be identified also. And so, our family would welcome the opportunity to facilitate discussions about funding and mitigation among the interested parties. Some of who, many of who have already made site visits, including the landowners, GSA, people from GSA, RCDC, Open Space, Parks, several of you and others have already visited this land to see what's involved. So I'm here if anybody has questions, and I want to thank all of you for your attention to all of these details.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Our next speaker is Nicola Frey, to be followed by Doug Ledebower.

Hi. Thank you for the kind words. I appreciate them. Those were five of the nine proposals that I put together. The wording for them came from a lot of discussions that we had as the working group, but also were many, many meetings I had with residents who live in the area, both coffee meetings and larger meetings and in-between meetings and all sorts of discussions that I had with lots of residents in the area. As Petaluma continues implementing the general plan, the climate action framework, and the North Station-specific plan, I believe we have an opportunity to reimagine one of our city's most important transportation corridors. the North McDowell Boulevard from Corona Road to Washington Street. For decades, this corridor has been designated primarily to move vehicles. But the future of North McDowell should be about moving people safely, efficiently, and sustainably. I believe North McDowell is the missing link as the city connects many of the investments this council has already made. You've invested in SMART. You've adopted a general plan that encourages complete neighborhoods and housing near transit. You're planning a vibrant North Station District and you're committed to ambitious climate zones. What we need now is that corridor that brings these investments together. South McDowell Boulevard and the other traffic projects have already shown that this is possible. Improvements like roundabouts, traffic calming, landscaping, and safety accessible pedestrian crossings have demonstrated that we can improve safety and mobility at the same time. And North McDowell deserves that same forward-thinking approach. Imagine a tree-lined boulevard with protected bicycle lanes, wider sidewalks, safer accessibility crossings, landscape medians, and modern roundabouts where appropriate. A corridor that connects the neighborhoods to schools, businesses, parks, and a smart station while creating a welcome northern gateway to Petaluma. This isn't a transportation project. It's a housing project, an economic development project, and a climate project. I encourage the council to work with input from residents and begin developing a comprehensive North McDowell corridor plan that lines transportation, housing, economic development, and public space into one unified vision. Let's make North McDowell more than a road. Let's make it the corridor that connects Petaluma's plans with its future. Thank you.

Thank you. Doug Leiterbauer, to be followed by Duane Bellinger.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council. My name is Doug Lativore. I represent the partnership that owns the two parcels on Corona Road that I think have been referred to by a couple of council members this evening. The address is 470 and 498 Corona Road. Our parcels are within the sphere of influence, within the urban growth boundary, and lie about a quarter mile east of the transit center. I wanted to first thank the consultant team. I think the process thus far has been very transparent, collaborative, and accessible to everybody. While we're at a very preliminary stage, I wanted to offer two constructive comments regarding the consultant's presentation. On the map that was up there just a moment ago, the focus area one transit village map, it shows a conceptual open space hub that runs kind of north and south on the eastern side. The way it shows on the plan, just bisects our property, which would really limit our ability to develop it. During that workshop meeting in March, the group that I was with discussed kind of focused on maybe a transition as that crosses Corona Road. We were looking at an enhanced pedestrian pathway that would lead and ultimately connect to Sonoma Mountain Parkway Trail and Turnbridge Park. We could probably accomplish this by expanding one side of a residential public street with a greenbelt or a paseo, which this basically would preserve design flexibility, allow the street to meander naturally, and encourage a creative site plan. I'm definitely in favor of open spaces or maybe a pocket park of some kind, but bisecting this forest with a huge open space hub would make it very difficult to deliver the type of housing that I think you're looking for. Additionally, the land use map showed the front part of our property is medium density residential, the back portion as lowest intensity residential. which being a quarter mile from the transit center, I don't think makes sense. I think it would be beneficial to look at zoning the entire piece, medium density residential, but as Councilman Scribbs mentioned, limiting the height to two stories, which would preserve the neighbor's privacy, yet you'd still be able to yield additional housing units. I think TOC policies are pretty clear that jurisdiction should increase residential capacity on parcels located within a half mile of a transit center, and I think our LAN provides you that opportunity. Thank you for your time, and I can answer any questions that you might have.

Thank you very much. Dwayne Bellinger, to be followed by Darren Rakusen.

good evening council members uh first of all i want to say that uh the the terms i enjoyed hearing a transit oriented village uh trans uh transit center mixed use urban mixed use neighborhood shopping centers i want to say that although they're beautiful and they need a shopping center they need a market You can't have walking community that doesn't have a market. And we went to put in the Croneli, put in the Lagorn Market. And at this point, for fewer houses, but if it's going to be walkable, we need at least a portion of it reserved, maybe even just two acres. The... The other thing I'd like to say is that the issue about the rural, I turned in a map that addresses the rural use, the people who live along Eli. If you look at the map, all of them would have a choice to continue as is. If they're annexed into the city, they'd be also able to add ready units at some time in the future once the utilities are in. What I wanted not see happen is if we try to make a circle out of what was Vallejo's lot 300 we will end up with making the same estate was made across the gentleman who just spoke that property there you see it has a flood problem that wasn't settled when the rest of the property was annexed it's got a no no sidewalks because of that lack of planning and the worst part of it I think is that Monica Street was closed off to being an access to the rest of the city and I think it's too large he could probably tell you that whether monica street could be used for a walkway for the children to walk into the other neighborhoods and other than walking on corona which probably won't be fixed for some time I asked him my map I asked him a walking trail on corona I could explain why it is the trail on the rail is on the side it's on. It's because it's delivering freight. It's delivering seeds on the other side that the other side of the rail is saved for use to deliver rail material. So they put the walkway on the north side. One other question. Oh, in terms of concentrations, the state is expecting us to average in the neighborhood of 20 per unit per acre. And that's gonna be difficult to get it designed properly so that it doesn't look like the area that we built more recently. We've got to have possibly taller buildings, but spaced apart so you can see between them and give you a feel of a nice modern city. Not with the ground may be covering no more than 80% of any lot. Anyway, thank you very much.

Thank you. Darren Rack is in to be followed by Morgan Bellinger.

Thank you, Mayor and Council. And I think from the Council's commentary, it's pretty clear everyone wants to jump past visioning into implementation because that's where all the exciting things happen. I think a discussion of land use right now, whether it's the general plan or this specific plan, we're hindered a lot by not understanding what the zoning code is going to be. I would assume this specific plan will be like the CPSP and have its own zoning designations, not necessarily one-to-one with what our IZO updates are going to be. So the one that always sticks out to me, whether we're talking general plan or this plan, is maker microbusiness. What does that mean? The general, I mean, the name means nothing. I get the vision that is invoked by that. But when you look at the actual general plan land use designation, it's the same as business park, except for a couple uses. So what is our eventual, like what are hints of a potential zoning designation that get you there? I think you could say that about any of these designations. You know, we've talked a lot about design standards. That's something that came up at Planning Commission. I think we've hoped for that citywide. And when we say the word objective design standards, we want to be careful whether we're talking like design guidelines or objective design standards for projects that are streamlined under residential projects that are exempt from discretionary review. Get really clear about what design standards we're talking about. And then are those baked into the zoning designations or are those more citywide? Or where do those live in this specific plan? Because when we talk sense of place, it's another thing that gets really nebulous without some of that specificity. I like saying sense of place, but it's important to codify, like, what is this place? So we are on the agricultural boundary. We are next to this industrial area. We are next to rail. What does that invoke or look like? I like the discussion of feathering as we get toward the edges. There's kind of balancing that with what we sold voters to even expand this area in the first place. It was kind of like there was a purpose to doing that. So I think there's a balance there to strike. And then when it comes to industry and economics, I think it is really important to understand who's there and what the capacity is. I would love to have grocery stores on every block, but you need a lot of people to support a grocery store that actually works and makes money. So, you know, the Leghorn Shopping Center is already right there. I'm not sure you're going to build one in this housing, even if you get 1,000 to 2,000, 3,000 people, that it can support another grocery store. And you're not that far from the rest of town. So I think an economic component of this, if it's an existing condition in the general plan with statistics we can pull from, excellent. And I think when we cross-reference plans like that, it is important to have exact references. So if you say this is already in the general plan, we already went over that, We don't need to analyze that. Great. Point right to it. And we're going to get there. This is vision. I'm just saying for that future plan, we want to make sure that we integrate these things effectively. But I think a real economic stress test of, like, here's the amount of people we think we're going to inject per the EIR, which will need some kind of number established, What does that mean for actual demand and industry impacts? And then, yeah, how do we define when we say we want these small business rows and everything, what does the zoning code look like to get there? Thank you.

Thank you. Morgan Bellinger to be followed by Tom Scott.

Good evening. It's great to see this coming together. If we get this right, we have an opportunity to make a dent in decades of redlining by growing vibrant housing supply. I was disappointed to hear a council member relay the story of a neighbor to proposed medium or high density zoning, saying they would fight tooth and nail against a three story building next door. The state has spent the last 20 years taking away those teeth and those nails, most recently with SB 79. Look at what's happening in Brisbane as of July 1st. The trend of the state encouraging housing near transit is only going to intensify over the lifetime of this specific plant. But more importantly, Measure Y and Measure B are the foundations for Focus Area 1. And looking at the enormous margins by which they passed, I don't understand why we would entertain such a strange attempt at a hyper-local tooth and nail filibuster. With those measure Y and B foundations and with the state's new orientation towards housing, I question what role unelected neighbors with parcels whose zoning isn't changing have in approving housing on adjacent lots that they don't own. I think it'll be helpful to get specific about how they'll be impacted. If I own a house next to a proposed three-story apartment building, the only things that'll change about my quiet enjoyment of my home are parking, noise, privacy, and shadows. We have a noise ordinance, curtains, and fences. I don't know what we can do about those pesky shadows. That brings us to the real issue. I hope the plan can include specifics eventually about street parking management. Nobody owns city street parking in front of their house, and the idea that someone can block the will of the voters and the state because someone might park there is absurd. Let's implement parking maximums and unbundled parking, require overnight parking permits on nearby streets, and distribute those permits equitably. I know that's very in the weeds for a visioning exercise, but when building community support, it's important to outline the tools available that we can use to achieve housing justice. Also, I have a couple of quick, much less severe ideas. Is there a potential for a high school anywhere near this, maybe north or east of it? It's sad that the nearest options are miles away, and it seems like a good opportunity for a tech maker or ag integration with a new school. And then I appreciate the mayor's comments about grocery access. I think it's critical when imagining walkable communities to consider residents getting off the train and stopping for dinner ingredients as they walk home from work. Although not, as Councilmember Kater-Thompson mentioned, one with a sea of parking. Again, thank you very much for your work on this.

And thank you. And Tom Scott.

I just wanted to say thank you for your time tonight and I just mainly wanted to come here and hear you deliberate about this subject and find out what your different opinions are and what your positions are. I do have one unusual idea that I thought I'd present tonight, which is to, believe it or not, get a Ukrainian tank. There's been 4,000 of them captured in Ukraine by Ukrainians from Russia. And I think it would be just incredibly strange and it would kind of put Petaluma on the map as far as I don't know. I just think it represents the fight for freedom that has been missing in this country for a long time in a very strange way. an interesting idea i i just wanted to throw it out there it's not uh set in stone obviously but uh we send ships over to europe for lng with lng and so i thought one of them could come back and i thought the ukrainians would love the idea of getting more support from the united states for uh weapons and various things that they might need. It's an amazing story, what's going on over there. I think it just really fascinates me. Anyway, thank you, and I enjoyed hearing you deliberate.

Thank you. And with that, do we have any hands on Zoom for us?

We do. Our first speaker on Zoom will be Frank Cordom. If you'd like to unmute and make your comment. It looks like we might be having some technical difficulties. He is unmuted, but we can't hear you, Frank.

This is Frank Cordom. Can you hear me now?

Yes, we can hear you now. Your three minutes starts now.

uh i appreciate all the comments of the council members recognizing the importance of groundwater recharge and burnable pools and um i think uh i would look along with my sister julie groves i appreciate the opportunity working with all the state various stakeholders including the groundwater sustainability agency and friends of the pelham river and Resource Conservation District and the Open Space District see if there's ways to protect some of these resources and improve the health of the aquifer, the Pelham Valley Aquifer. And I won't repeat, the council members were very eloquent, so I won't repeat what they've had to say, but I do want to note that this is, the property that's being considered for development is basically the edge of the community separators that I think are a valuable resource in an era when open space is under siege and not properly valued as for the benefits that it provides. And so I appreciate the council's efforts to kind of keep that, the future development, which is an affidavit for this area under control. So thank you very much.

Thank you, Frank. And Veronica Olson, please unmute and make your comment. Veronica, there should be an option to unmute. We can't hear you. Well, Veronica, we can't hear you.

and that's our first technical difficulty i understand and she's not managed to weigh in at this point then and uh okay council advises me that some comments were received from veronica and uh um if there is more we will be welcoming it and any further comment. But lacking the ability to connect with the speaker right now, we will close public comment on the item and bring it back up to council. And I see staff would like to weigh in first.

Yes, good evening, Mayor, Council Members, Heather Hines, Special Projects Manager. I just wanted to provide a little bit of context with the existing TOD plan from 2013. We're in a much different situation than we were in 2013 with regard to this station. This specific plan is definitely building on that existing plan. Many of the priorities, the recommendations from that specific plan are things that the community has continued to echo and that Annie covered as part of her presentation. There's a lot of things that have changed. One, we have the station. Two, we have a new PDA in this area, which we did not have in 2013. We have the new Measure Y that was passed with the urban growth boundary that got into a little bit more specificity about potential annexation area. Two out of three of the priority opportunity sites around the Corona Station have already been developed. Since the development of the TOD, many of the transit improvements on McDowell have been completed. The MOP along the smart rail has been completed. So there's a lot in the existing plan that has been either augmented or completed, and so this specific plan building off of that as opposed to, ignoring or erasing it. When you also look at the 2013 TOD, the downtown station had about 40 pages about vision and, you know, those beautiful pictures that are in that plan, whereas the Corona station had like five pages. So this is really giving this Petaluma North Station its moment, its attention, the additional detail into it. So just wanted to make sure we didn't take the opportunity to think about that specific plan and that this is actually building on it and giving it some of the attention that it warrants to take it to the next level. It also, this was released as an RFP by the city, so there was opportunity for a whole range of consultants to submit and be selected for this to build off of it as well. So I just wanted to add that as a little bit of follow-up.

Thank you very much. I think we've had some good public comment, appreciate that, and a good bit of council dialogue tonight. So I'm sure we're trying to synthesize our last thoughts and last questions probably too. I'd like to start with Council Member Barnicle.

Well, I separated my questions and comments, so I do have some more extensive stuff. First, thank you to everybody who commented, in particular, Nicola and Julie, for submitting such well-thought-out commentary, and to Heather for the background. When we were looking at the 1st station project, and, like, literally catalyst for me running 1 of the lacking pieces was a vision for around this area and it was the lack of consistency between the zoning code and the general plan and the stationary master plan and things like that. All that stuff created this. like chaos of like, well, I don't know what they wanted. Well, this one said this and this one said that. So I totally echo what Heather said there. It actually really brought back a lot of the sort of traumatic public commentary from that process. So thank you. So jumping into my comments now. some of the public comments talked about this but i think one of the things about this is like just as a council we and the community needs to understand this is like this is a huge community asset it's not a neighborhood asset like this is a regional asset and um when you live next to something that's desirable you need a plan to share it um and that's like how i feel about this um having worked on the first smart campaign intensely and tabled and called like phone banked and worked with your father on this um the vision was for these walkable communities centered around Transit and that's what we get to plan out here this is like literally the the vision that like you know I didn't love trains I didn't campaign for this because I love trains I can campaign for it because I love walkable communities so um this is like an amazing opportunity for us to think about this um I think a few things that come to mind for me. There's a few parcels that I think are going to need some real thought in terms of how we make this happen. I don't think the whole thing, but I think there's a few of them that really do. One is the USPS building. We really need to think about how we pry that away from the hands of the federal government, how we bring in some maybe large institutional tenant or something like that that wants to be there for a considerable period of time and put in money and be the anchor tenant. But I feel like there's some sort of like, I don't want to get too much into the implementation, but give us a little bit of a playbook for how we actually go about that because... i don't see how we create an identity of the maker space without a few things happening and that parcel just feels so damn critical to actually making making that sort of vision start to come to life on that alley um or corridor area um the second one that i just didn't see in here again is the rainier at 101 going under the highway Like that strip right there is this place where there's a ton of people that will funnel down and that's going to be, there's going to be an amazing river access that's created there. And so like we have to think about that last little stretch there where the Petaluma Transit Facility is and then there's another series of small things and then there's the egg shop. How do we make that like a welcoming walk into that area or way to transition into that space? Because that to me is this real nexus for a lot of people to be re-emerging back toward the corridor or leaving the corridor or passing through the corridor. And then the third area is just the shopping center and thinking through, like, how do we start to transition this large, probably 40-acre shopping center into something? I like the idea of focusing over Bailu Casey and starting to give it some edge and things like that. but I'm excited about all those prospects and I would just encourage a little more going deeper on a few of the real like sticky wicket hard topics versus like trying to do everything. The other thing is I think our maker industrial stuff is a lot of it is just us getting out of our own way. I think we do need to have some like street design standards for this area because Obviously, they've been designed like the design was not for spilling out into the street and, you know, places like hen house, like sort of had to, like, go against the grain a little bit. And I think the same with the cannabis dispensary, you know, like all of that was there is like truly industrial space. And we're seeing that Griffo and hen house and Lagunitas, they like, oh, actually, people want to come here. But it's really hard to do certain things there. And I know from talking to places like I would encourage you to go talk to Griffo about their experience in trying to have events there and things like that, because they're still in the middle of a fight, you know, or not a fight, but like in the middle of like, I don't think I can do this because of the city's process or the city's zoning code. And I don't know all the details of it, but like it's it's a hell story where like a business tried to be innovative and creative and create this space. And it's like, I want that, and they can't, right? And so, like, a lot of it, I think, is just us getting out of our own way and being more flexible and even encouraging that sort of thing. Otherwise, those parking lots are just going to be parking lots fronting things. We need to figure out how we activate them. Then we talked some about buffers. I would prefer to, like, I try not to say what I don't want. So, but in this case, I don't know how to say it. Like, I don't want the big concrete walls that just sort of, like, create this, like, you know, really sort of militaristic wall of, like, that's the city and this is not the city. And we see it down at, like, Southgate down on Lakeville where the house is, and then there's just this big wall that sort of, Walls off the land and, like, talk about view sheds and, like, what's the view shed when you're looking at a concrete wall. So I'd love to see us try and, like, do some more integration there. I like the idea of, like, a green buffer along the edge of the city properties and stuff. But, um. I certainly would hate to see, like, a big concrete wall around it, you know, and, like, that's the city and out there is the county. I think it really sort of, like, that's what will, in my opinion, like, start to really sort of undermine the integrity of the view sheds and just the ambiance of everything, not necessarily people living there. Yeah. A couple of the council members, I think Council Member Cater-Thompson talked about some of the areas like outside of the study area, like down under the, at the crossing and whatnot. you're not able to look at that, right? Like you're specifically focused in the study area, right? Okay. If so, I've got a few extra things to throw in there. So then I just want to get to the housing piece of it. And I think this goes to the jobs piece of it too, is just like, One of the big things that we've seen is just like a lot of our greenfield growth has not been economically viable long term. Right. I don't want to see us extending infrastructure out for things that where the tax base is not going to actually cover the infrastructure long term. like let's use this as an opportunity to not just like um build it because it's easy and the neighborhoods will accept it um but like let's actually like learn from the the failures of of our current development paradigm and realize that like you know we need to have um some sense of density and walkability and things like that to um to really encourage it narrow streets i'd like us to design for like 15 mile an hour streets in this area I don't think we're going to continue to go out. So if we think about this as like the final hurrah of streets in Petaluma, maybe is like, you know, think about it that way, at least right of like, what is a 15 mile an hour street look like? It probably is very narrow with a with a sharp edge. I think we can minimize private open space to encourage more of a public lifestyle. So you know, small lots, less open space, things like that really sort of like resonates with me. I don't think that this is nothing we're designing for all the people who currently live here. We're designing for the people who might live here. So I appreciate council memberships always coming back to advanced mobility and to me like that's like one of the big unknowns in the future of all this is like autonomous vehicles and like it's like walkability and all that stuff like that really helps with like being a one car household or being in you know living without a car but like when we think about the impact of autonomous vehicles on people and people who are trying to like eliminate fixed costs and eliminate insurance costs and things like that like Eliminating your transportation costs and just paying for an autonomous, you know ride every once in a while Like that's the potential like that's truly disruptive. And so I mean Waymo is already approved to come to Petaluma. It's just a matter of having a business case for it. So I'm not saying this plan is going to give them a business case, but I do think It can contribute to it and then yeah i think those are my big points um i appreciate the comment about not bisecting the property in general i want to create as much flexibility as we can to um to see you know as much affordable by design housing products as we can see um and I think you nailed the land use designations for me personally. So thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Cater-Thompson.

I agree with Council Member Brian Barnicle's comments, but I just want to come back to we don't really want this to be a food desert. You don't have to have huge grocery stores. They can be smaller. You know, maybe you're not going to get all your items, but you have your basics there. And so I think that that's really important. And I just think that, you know, I do want more flexibility. And when we were talking about the land and the moderate-sized homes, I'd like to see small and moderate lots. I mean, smaller lots, but moderate and smaller homes combination. And I'm I'm really not looking forward, I'm not looking at apartments in this area. I'm looking at more condos, four cell housing is really what I'd like to see in this area so people have an opportunity to move back to this city and actually live here, such as my grandkids and other people. I think that's just really all I have to say except that I realize that with CID Commons that that's not part of this, but I think we need to look at the bridge access and going underneath the rail bridge just as the larger picture of mobility within the general plan that would incorporate that into this plan also. Thanks.

And just for the audience at home, that's a pedestrian bike bridging. Thank you.

It is a pedestrian bike and maybe emergency vehicle bridge. It's basically just a bridge so you can get across. It's not a road? It's not a road, no.

Thank you. Vice Mayor DeCarli?

Thank you. The first thing I would like to address is housing in what's being called the transit village. You know, in land use with the general plan, we've done a lot of back and forth and, you know, a lot of negotiating on how to reach our numbers. And we did, and I think we exceeded them. But, you know, something like going beyond the current urban growth boundary should be a last resort if we don't have enough housing in town, if we can't get enough infill, if we didn't meet our numbers. You know, we had... measure Y to renew the urban growth boundary. I supported that. I think it's been a great thing for Petaluma, but I think in part it was a little deceptive to add areas of potential expansion because most voters, I believe, were under the impression that we were renewing the boundary, not adding to it, which is what we're talking about right now. And so, you know, we shouldn't be building over there. You know, everybody up here loves to talk about how they want to preserve and save farmland and protect our rural character. That's a few hundred acres of farmland. That's its own little pocket of it between Eli, the railroad tracks, and Corona of farmland. And, you know, once that's gone, it's gone. and we shouldn't be expanding into it. There's no way to feather that off and make that more palatable, I think. You're going to be looking at development no matter what. And for the MTC standards, it's going to have to be extremely dense. So there's not going to be kind of what's talked about up here of all these small homes everywhere. It's going to have to meet a minimum standard for the city to qualify for grant money. Otherwise, we don't qualify for it. And part of me wonders if that's the whole reason we're doing the plan anyway is just to get grant money. And, you know, so is this for Petaluma? Is this what Petaluma really wants? Or is this to get more grant money for transit? And I appreciate the comments. I didn't know anybody else was going to bring this up, but I'm talking about water. And those lower areas, that flood, it is a recharge for the aquifers down there. And that soil throughout those few hundred acres is a very sandy soil. It absorbs water like crazy. And water is an extremely important asset around here. And I don't think we should choke off the aquifer's potential to recharge itself. So, you know, it's not just the lower area that floods annually during the winter. It's that entire area. And then if we build over it, we're also going to have the problem of runoff from it as well. Then, you know, another problem with looking at putting housing over there is what I mentioned, I think, during the economic plan. If we put housing next to industrial, which Lagunitas is very close, it's almost right on the other side, you introduce the potential for problems between housing and industrial. You know, in my example last time, which is happening right now, is over on First Street. You have Alex Ice Cream, and they're leaving, and they have some reasons for it, but they've been getting hounded for months and months and months because at some point, the city allowed housing to be built right next to them, and then the noise they create to do their business became a big problem for the residents there. And I can understand people being upset about noise, but this was a situation that should have never been. And so we shouldn't be encouraging housing near industrial areas and places of business where there's going to be noise, where there's going to be smells, where there's going to be work at all hours. We shouldn't be doing that. I do appreciate that this plan does really look at the businesses that are existing and promotes finding ways to help them out, to create opportunities for new businesses. I would like to see, the rail is such an important asset in Petaluma. I think it would be foolish not to look at more ways we can be creative and try to utilize that for freight. That would help smart, that would help our economy. That would do a lot of things. But anyway, I do appreciate the emphasis on trying to help businesses. I think that at this point, we shouldn't take the 2013 plan off the table. Thank you, Heather, for filling in some stuff on that. But I don't think we should be taking it off the table. I mean, it's very, very much in line with what we're talking about tonight. I think if we use that as the foundation, I think that would save us a lot of money and a lot of headache, too, because that area is largely unchanged. The station is built. I mean, I think the big difference was the 2013 plan, as far as the Corona station went, emphasized that through their findings that this was mostly going to be a park and ride station and not housing oriented. And so obviously now there's development going on where they had proposed parking in their plan, but that's really the major difference. And then there's a huge emphasis on obviously the downtown station is actually, I mean, that is probably the best plan that I've read through. It's a little over 200 pages long. And it's extremely detailed. It's extremely thoughtful. It has design standards in it, you know, mostly for downtown. And it gives a vision of what Petaluma wants to see, you know, at least at the downtown station. But I would love in this plan coming forward to see actual design standards and what we want this to look like and not leaving it up to whichever developer comes along, you know, what their vision is for it. because it should be what Petaluma's vision is. And so I really don't think we should be taking the 2013 plan off the table. I think actually between now and the next time this comes back, that plan should be sent to all of us. Everybody should look at it, read through it, really understand what we're being asked tonight to let expire and go away. I think it's actually a very, very important plan that would be great for Petaluma. And then, you know, I kind of want to emphasize again that this vision also includes some, you know, some real stuff in it as far as different demographics and what's going to happen with the market and what the actual impact of this plan could be. I think that's extremely important. We can't, I don't think we should be approving a plan without knowing what that plan is going to actually do. And then I want to see more emphasis on what viewsheds and sense of place we're trying to preserve and what that actually means. Because again, that's why people live here. That's why people move here. And I think that the people that are here are the ones that we really need to be taking care of. They make a huge investment to move here, to live here, and they all want to be here. And we need to respect that. As far as, again, I'll go into McDowell. I don't think we should be looking at a redesign there. I don't think that should be part of the vision. There's a lot of connectivity in that area. And putting more emphasis into something we just spent $12 million redoing, we shouldn't be. And so those are my main comments about it. As far as... As far as what you want us to actually consider tonight, the 89 plan does seem largely completed. You know, I don't see any reason at this point to keep that. The 2013 plan, like I said, I don't think we should be taking off the table. We should be considering making that the foundation for this and keeping it. You know, the third one about including the transit village for annexation, I don't support that. I think that's farmland, and I think we need to keep that farmland. Focused development planning on transit village and health district subareas. Yeah, I mean, I can see a lot of that being necessary. I mean, as far as the grocery stores go, we have one Safeway a few minutes away, another Safeway maybe less than 10 minutes, O'Reilly's, the Trader Joe's, a grocery outlet going in, there's Palace of Fruit, there's a couple little Quickie Marts. I mean, there's a lot of stuff within a few minutes of this area. And, you know, I think if we were going to even look at putting another grocery store in there or some type of market, we'd have to look at how those would be impacted. And then, you know, the next one, McDowell, I don't support that. You know, and then maybe, yeah, I don't know. I mean, the next two are, I've kind of mentioned already, but those are my main comments on this.

Thank you very much. Council Member Now.

Thank you. First off, mcdowell has to be safer so i'm all for safer streets and um i forget which councilman movie care thompson about less driveways because if you have gone into hen house or over to the farmhouse it's very confusing and i like to see that improved and um i'd also like to see um our first-time home buyers have an opportunity to have a supply to purchase something that's not over a thousand square feet that they're smaller um some of my um very favorite people are first-time home buyers in the brody ranch subdivision and their kids go to corona creek and to meadow school and i They're very happy in that neighborhood. They just want to walk to Lagunitas. And it is a real tourist opportunity. We have Griffo, who has bands that play out in their parking lot. We've got the farmhouse. We've got the henhouse. We've got Lagunitas. We've got this central milling. And Skippies can expand. It's a market. I mean, you go in there, and you can buy pretty much everything on your shopping list. And I can get my clover products. So we do want to look at those opportunities and maybe even a shuttle that they could work on. I don't know how then they would pay for it, but connecting that neighborhood to those local businesses and to the smart station. And it would be a great mixed-use area where you have restaurants and then above the restaurants, You have the, you know, a tenant. And you have, like we have downtown in the industrial area off of First Street, Aqua's Cafe. That would be perfect in that little area, which is a community hub that people go and have coffee in their neighborhood. So, there's lots of opportunities. I really like the things that Councilmember Vardikala had to say for his vision. The other council member, so I'm looking forward to seeing this come back and see what we can do in the future.

Thank you Thank You council member trips

Okay, thank you for the reports and all the discussions. I agree with just about everything that's been said. I'd just like to add on what Councilmember Alex was saying about the roads. I sort of agree with the North McDowell section that since we just put that money in, but what we didn't do was actually from the section that's actually just south of there that goes all the way to Washington Street. That was not repaid and redone. And that is actually fairly the more dangerous section for transport by both walking and by bike. I've been on that area a lot. So that the graph that you showed might be a good concept for the section between Washington and then all the way to the train tracks where they cross, because that's about where where things are change over. So I'd like to keep that concept in there. But more important than that road is the Corona Road that was also mentioned. We need to have that concept developed and we need to work with the county to make sure that the road all the way to Adobe Road and all the way to Petaluma Boulevard. What does that redesign actually look like to support all this new housing? And part of that new road has got to be these pathways. And all these students that are going to be living there, there's no school in that little section. None was being mentioned. Where are they going to go to school? And how are they going to get there by walking and biking? What pathway is there to go from that little section to where they need to be in a safe manner so that they don't have to be driven? So that path has to be established as a key safe routes to school program, how they make that happen. So that is absolutely critical that they get through a neighborhood and then over to the area so they can go to the law school district or to the Corona school or to the junior high school. That all needs to be mapped out now so that those routes are established. I also like the comment about the feathering, but I'd like to enhance that feathering. What would be nice is on the edges, not the brick walls that were mentioned, but we need to have gardens and trees that lead up to non-fencing backyards, which then leads up to more landscaping in a backyard, which then goes to a single family house, which then leads to maybe a two-story, then three-story inland. So that feathering up needs to be not just the buildings, but also the landscape needs to be feathered right down to the rural area. And maybe even include a community garden area in the area as a community space that folks can work on on those areas so that we actually have rural actual production in these areas that are on these edges okay then on um there's another idea that's come up i saw earlier at another city did um These parcels, unless you organize it well, all gonna be bought one at a time, but by a developer or some prospector that's gonna go, okay, I'm just gonna buy the land and just sit on it, and I'm gonna force people to buy a lot more or pay a lot more for it later down the road, because I'm gonna control this land. I've seen that happen in other cities. Whereas one city said, no, we're not doing that. We're gonna form a development corporation nonprofit quasi-governmental, private, and it's a nonprofit, and they actually, like, sponsored with the bank, and they go out and say, okay, we're going to buy all the land from all the people at equitable price, and nobody gets a dime until everybody agrees to pay the equitable price. So we need to have this corporation, nonprofit, buy all the land ahead of time now. And then work with the developer to get it developed. Maybe even a design build type of design as we go forward. So that process needs to be put in place now. Because if you could leave it up, obviously the parcels out there, whoever wants to come develop, come develop. No, that's not going to work at all. That's going to be a crazy mishmash of craziness that we don't want to go toward. So I want to reemphasize that process, the purchasing and the development plan needs to be organized, holistic, singular entity in the middle before it's released to developers. Okay. Then on the, I mentioned the Corona Road, and what is not included in the master plan, which is in the circle, was the auction house and that property there. That's inside that circle. What are your plans for that property? Is that going to be housing? Is it going to be park? Is it going to stay the way it is? Because right now it's used as a parking lot for trucks. It's a hot dog restaurant and occasionally may be used even as an auction house once in a while. But that's one of those properties that, okay, it's up for grabs as to what could it be. Could it be a complete wetlands area as a park, part of the Greenway? Could it be that? But that has to be included because that's part of that circle right there. Then on the, or one recommendation ahead of time, since all this maker space and we're talking about all these places and all these mobile homes that we are talking about, I don't know how many of us actually walked it or biked and has actually gone through all these neighborhoods to really feel it and see it. So maybe we should have the whole council get on bikes and take a ride and go down all these streets on a day and really see it, or at least a group of folks, work group, whatever you have, should actually physically go out there and see it together as a group and talk about it as they're going and make a whole day tour out of it. Nice, easy bike ride tour of these areas. So I'd like to see that happen with your work group and with you guys actually do that so that you understand what it's like to Bike and walk in these areas because then you got to feel it. You just can't look at it from the map and think about it. No, you got to feel these things. So I really highly recommend you actually get out there maybe with some of us and let's take a tour. So, otherwise, I like everything that that's been said and what you're working on and let's make it all happen as soon as possible. So, those are my comments. Thank you.

Thank you. And we are now at 9 minutes to 11. and I'm going to try and bring it in under the wire so we don't have to have a vote for after 11. First, I thank Councilmember DeCarli for saying such kind things about the 2013 report. I'll get to go home and tell my wife, who was on that committee, that she did a great job. She did think that the Corona Station effort was kind of a little tic-tac onto the edge of the big thing downtown, but that's how that works. And I would concur on the park and community gardens. And we have the showcase for that, that Sunrise Community Gardens is the gem of the city for gardens. And it's in the work area that could be replicated. Also, in the UGB, I mean, we told the voters we were reducing the possible annexations by three quarters. And we only left in the one who we thought had value because of the corona station. So we really reduced all potential encroachment into UGB when we did that, when we, in our public messaging there. And broadly, I would agree with what Councilmember Barnicle and Kater Thompson mentioned. And then I did like Councilmember Shribbs bringing up biking because when rebuilding had their big workday, I like to get out and thank the work crews, and an awful lot of them are in the mobile home parks. And so, I just biked on across, and there I am in tootling around the neighborhood. So, I've got a good feel for that. But also, you know, you're a bicyclist too. we can shoot up the Smart Trail to Smart's offices for a meeting. So we can attend meetings. Thank God for the e-bike. I arrived polite. But we have great access, and I want to continue to have the group have great access focus on mobility. But now Healthy Petaluma's offices is in the smart offices. And so, you know, that's another business meeting I get to go to that's easy access. We had this county supervisor debates at the Healthy Petaluma or at Petaluma Health Center and able to bike to that pretty darn easily too. We're making pieces come together in this town. It's very cool. Also, we had transit day at the JC and we biked over to that. And If I wasn't here tonight, I would have been watching the game. Don't say the answer, anybody who was watching. I mean, got that taped. But I would have been at either Hen House or Beyond the Glory, who have big screens for sports events like that, and I would have biked to those events. Today for lunch, we wanted to bike somewhere. Two Niner Diner was closed for lunch today, Monday. We went to Penn Grove Market. Penngrove Market would be the ideal installation to drop in. I mean, it's a little boutique-y, it means things, but actually, shockingly, prices are good at the Penngrove Market. So, the Tel 2 Niner, I said this, but, and this weekend, I was in the city, and my sister-in-law made pizzas with dough from Skippy's, or from Central Milling.

Central Milling.

We have a gem going on in this area, but I want to make sure that the plan has the tools that drive investment into the area. I love the vision, and it's a good vision, and I think we will be able to create the future from this plan. I'm looking forward to it.

And I'll make a quick few comments. I just want to say in 1998 when the UGB was voted in by the voters, this land was designated as an area that was going to be annexed. And then the other thing is, if you want to bring agricultural back, you want to talk about people complaining, wait till the poop of the cows start and the wind goes south. And plus, we have property owners that have property rights. And if they want to sell their property, they have a right to. These are not agricultural. They're not used as agricultural today the way it was in the past and And I agree that just something like a Pen Grove market I mean that's what you really need in an area like this something small that actually has coffee and everything so barnacle one last graduate together and

Yeah, I appreciate you bringing up the UGB. I just, I really take issue with the idea that we did some sort of a bait and swish on voters with the UGB. Like, we had multiple meetings, Councilmember DeCarli, where we were talking about this, where we pulled certain things back and we put it right here for a very intentional reason. It was noticed over and over again. It was written as such. And so, like, we really shouldn't be misrepresenting the council and the transparency we brought to the UGB process. Secondarily, park and ride stations overwhelmingly don't perform as well as mixed use stations do in the network. On smart and just in general, they just don't. So if we're learning from experience and learning from examples, we should be trying to build mixed use, more vibrant stations if we care about smart being an actual long-term piece of infrastructure that is cost-effective. And then finally, you know, just having gone through my election in 2024, I talked to people in La Via that live right next to Hunt and Barron's. I talked to people who moved in right adjacent to Clover, and they love living in Petaluma, and they don't want the industrial things to leave. They love living in Petaluma because they have those industrial uses here. And so I think that more than people moving here and then saying, I want Lagunitas to shut down, they're moving here because they want to live next to Lagunitas. And I think that we, like, there's a reframe on all this stuff and the benefits of living close to where you want to be. And I just, I wanted to drop those things in.

Let me just check with staff here. Have you guys gotten an earful? Do you need to drive a question or we've done it all for one evening?

It would be great to get more clarity on what you guys feel about the plan area taking on the annexation area.

Can you put the is there a slide that you have that with a specific thing you want or is it was the 7 things that councilmember to currently reference time imagine you're asking about one of those.

I think we have clarity on all the other items. The reason we want maybe a straw poll on planning for the annexation area is because that's a significant investment of the budget in that planning. So if you were to give us... Yeah, let's do that.

Right. Okay. So I think we talked a lot about the annexation area, and we talked about a lot of different things going on with it, but the base question that staff is asking us to weigh in on, and we'll do it in a straw poll, is do we want to continue exploring and crafting the annexation area? And so hands up if you want them to continue. So one, two, three, four, and... Are you clear? Okay. And hands up if you wish them to drop it from the... We have. We have five votes. Sorry. Thank you. Okay. Are we clear? Thank you. We're very clear. Excellent. Thank everybody for staying tonight. There's a lot of going on going on, so I appreciate you all being here. Mr. Mayor?

We still do have this second public comment period.

So we are moving into thanking your team for being here and we're set.

And it is 11, Mayor. All right.

I'll make a motion to extend the meeting past 11.

How many minutes?

So through the public comment period. And there we go. So we have a motion. I need a second. We have a second by now. A motion by Kater Thompson. And can we do this by acclaim? So we do this by acclaim. All those in favor say aye. Online, right? This is your moment to say aye? Okay. Because we don't even know if they're online. Okay, good. So then we are... How many cards?

11. And there's 13 people online. Okay.

So we are opening the continued public comments for the evening, and we have checked online, and we have no hands raised online for this. So I will read your name, and I'll give you a count of five. And it's Maria Perez. One, two, three, four, five. Nicole Sandoval. Two, three, four, five. Pamela Harter. Thank you. Gabby Ortiz? Nicola Frye? You want to come speak on ice out? Come on down.

And

Because these were the general comments where everyone got one minute, I reset the clock to one minute.

Okay. Thank you. And is the clock ready? And the speaker's ready. And here we go.

Okay. I'm here tonight to ask you to see an opportunity where today you can only see a parcel of weed-infested, unused land. Just south of the Meridian Sousing development, between North McDowell and the Smart Rail line, It's a small city-owned triangular parcel. While it may seem insignificant, I believe it has the potential to become the front door to the proposed North Station neighborhood or the new northeast side of Petaluma. As our community invests in the North Station plan, implements the general plan, and continues to promote housing near transit, this is exactly the kind of space that should become a public asset not simply remain vacant and unused. Imagine a small park with shade trees, native landscaping, benches, bicycle parking, public art, and rain gardens that capture the stormwater. It could provide a welcoming place for residents, especially those living in the nearby mobile home parks. Commuters, cyclists, and visitors, while creating a recognizable gateway into this growing district. This parklet area supports many of the goals of the city, has already adopted.

Thank you, Nicola. We are at one minute. And you're one minute. So you've run your time. Thank you. Okay. Michael Treone is our next speaker. Alex Mensing. Nancy and Shannon Erickson. Maria Perez. and unnamed person, and Sierra Morantz. And with that, I'll close the public comment, the continued public comment, and adjourn the meeting. Thank you all very much.